Himachal HC quashes FIR against Jeetendra in sexual assault case

Himachal HC quashes FIR against Jeetendra in sexual assault case

The complainant had mentioned in the FIR that the actor was the son of her paternal aunt and that in January 1971 when the complainant was 18 years old, the actor allegedly made her join him on a movie set.

By Express News Service |Shimla |Updated: May 21, 2019 7:56:48 pm

Jeetendra had approached the High Court requesting that the FIR be quashed.

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has quashed an FIR that was filed against actor Jeetendra, where a cousin of the actor had raised allegations of being sexually assaulted by the Bollywood veteran in an incident that allegedly happened in a hotel in Shimla in the year 1971.

Jeetendra had approached the High Court requesting that the FIR be quashed.

Advertising

In a judgment given on Monday, Justice Ajay Mohan Goel quashed the FIR which was filed under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code at Women Police Station, Shimla on February 16, 2018, against Jeetendra.

22 Opposition leaders meet EC, demand 100% VVPAT checks in case of mismatch

PM Modi, Amit Shah meet Union ministers to thank them for 'service to nation'

The complainant had mentioned in the FIR that the actor was the son of her paternal aunt and that in January 1971 when the complainant was 18 years old, the actor allegedly made her join him on a movie set.

Advertising

The FIR states that the two drove from New Delhi to Shimla and shared a room in Shimla with two separate beds. Later, a drunk Jeetendra joined the two beds and assaulted her with the intent to outrage her modesty, the FIR mentions.

The High Court judgment states that the quashing of FIR was sought on the grounds that “the alleged incident dates back to the month of January, 1971 and as there is an inordinate delay in filing the FIR and further as no explanation is there for such an inordinate delay in registration of the impugned FIR, the same deserves to be quashed and set aside, because inordinate delay in registration of FIR raises grave doubt about the truthfulness of allegations, as it loses the advantage of spontaneity and danger creeps in of the introduction of coloured version, exaggerated account or concocted story as a result of deliberations and consultations.”

The actor mentioned in his petition that the complainant had filed the FIR through a lawyer by sending a copy from the United States. Such an act after a delay of over four decades after the alleged incident could be because despite the actor’s family owning a big media house the complainant’s daughter was not taken for a role she had auditioned for.

Noting that there was lack of “sufficient grounds for proceeding against the petitioner”, the court quashed the FIR.