Rape case against doc: Bombay HC asks ACP to be present during hearing
The Bombay high court (HC) has asked the assistant commissioner of police (ACP) of Mulund division to be present in court to give the reason for chapter proceedings being levied on a doctor.mumbai Updated: Jun 29, 2015 19:46 IST
The Bombay high court (HC) has asked the assistant commissioner of police (ACP) of Mulund division to be present in court to give the reason for chapter proceedings being levied on a doctor.
A division bench of justice Ranjit More and justice Anuja Prabhudessai was hearing a plea by Dr Jayesh Katira, who has been falsely implicated in a rape charge and has approached the court for quashing of the chapter proceedings. He has also filed a separate petition for quashing of the rape case in the high court.
Dr Katira runs a private hospital in Mulund. As per the petition, in August 2014, Katira asked a maid to stop coming to work as he claimed she was not working properly. In September, he got a call from the woman’s niece and she asked him to meet her. Katira met the girl in his car for a short while and, after meeting him, she lodged a complaint with the Mulund police, claiming Katira had sexually assaulted her.
The girl claimed to be a minor and thus relevant charges of Protection of Children f rom Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) and section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code were registered.
As per the petition filed by Katira, the medical tests for rape on the girl turned out to be negative. Katira was, meanwhile, sent to Arthur Road jail in September 2014. He was eventually granted bail in December 2014 and was made to sign a chapter case, which effectively means that he is guilty of the charges levied upon him and that he is a habitual offender.
Katira moved high court in March 2015 seeking the quashing of the chapter bond. The court has asked the ACP to be present on June 30 to explain why Katira was made to sign the chapter bond.
ACP Maruti Avhad (Mulund Division) told HT, “I have not been informed that I have to be present in court. I will go when I am asked to and do what the court directs me to do.”