False sexual harassment case Delhi High Court dismisses Sarvjeet Singh’s plea for inquiry against Jasleen Kaur
Singh was acquitted almost three years ago of all charges in 2019 after Kaur claimed he sexually harassed her in 2015 at a Delhi traffic signal. Jasleen Kaur gave a complaint to the police against Sarvjit Singh for molesting and using abusive words to humiliate him, in respect of which a case was registered at the police station under sections 354A/506 and 509 Indian Penal Code.
Sarvjit Singh first before the trial court and later before the appellate court Shri Puran Chand Additional Sessions Judge West Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, demanded action under sections 340 Cr.P.C and 195 of the IPC in respect of writing a false case against complainant. Which was set aside by both the courts, after which the said order was challenged by the petitioner before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court has dismissed Sarvjit Singh’s plea to take action against the then student of St. Stephen’s College, Jasleen Kaur.
This case was also in the news in the media at that time but the trial court acquitted Sarvjit Singh giving him the benefit of doubt in 2019.
After which he filed a petition before the Trial Court, implicating him in a false case and giving false testimony before the Hon’ble Court and sought action under Section 340 Cr.P.C and 195 of the IPC, which the Trial Court and later The Appellate Court also dismissed.
The above orders were challenged by Sarvjit Singh in the Hon’ble High Court saying that the Hon’ble Subordinate Courts has passed the order without taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case. Which is completely illegal.
Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain, hearing in the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, said that the order of the Trial Court and the Appellate Court is absolutely correct in which he has written that acquittal only by giving the benefit of doubt does not mean that the victim gave false testimony before the Hon’ble Court. which attracts an offense punishable under section 195 (fabricating false evidence) of the Indian Penal Code and the preliminary inquiry as contemplated of 340 CrPC be initiated against her.
The Hon’ble High Court observed that “the trial court in its judgment nowhere said that false case was filed by the victim or false evidence was given before the trial court,”
However The Court noted that Singh’s worry was understandable given that Kaur had made the incident public in the media, potentially harming Singh’s reputation.
Singh is free to file a case for defamation, the Court observed, but simple loss of reputation is not enough to trigger the provisions under Section 340 of Cr.P.C.
The present petition is devoid of merit, hence, dismissed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to initiate appropriate legal proceedings for the defamation alleged to have been caused by the respondent no. 2 towards the petitioner by lodging the present FIR in accordance with law or by initiating any other remedy as provided under law.
The application under section 340 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable under the given facts and circumstances of the case. The present petition alongwith pending applications, if any, stands dismissed.
Advocate Amish Aggarwala appeared for Singh.
State was represented by advocate Karan Jeet Rai Sharma.DOC-20220924-WA0028.-1
PDF Embedder requires a url attribute