As per the petitioner, a complaint was lodged by the female staff of Raj Bhavan’s peace room against him on May 7.
The petitioner contended that this case was an “afterthought” since the alleged incident of molestation and the subsequent wrongful restraint as alleged by the woman, took place on May 2. The petitioner highlighted the fact that the complaint lodged on May 2 against the molestation incident did not name him.
Further, it was informed that a notice under Section 41 A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) was issued to him and he duly complied with the same. The petitioner also highlighted the fact that he was granted bail in the case by a Magistrate Court on May 21.
The petitioner punched holes in the FIR by arguing that the allegations levelled against him were quite “improbable.”
“The complainant has mentioned in her plaint that she somehow managed to leave the room. Once she says that she was able to leave the room, her allegations of wrongful restraint, thus becomes improbable,” the petitioner’s counsel argued.
It was therefore, prayed to quash the FIR and the consequent proceedings lodged against the OSD.
Source: Barandbench
