Himachal HC cancels a FIR against Jeetendra in a case of sexual assault

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh annulled a RIF filed against actor Jeetendra, where a cousin of the actor had alleged to have been badually badaulted by the Bollywood Veteran during an incident that allegedly took place in a hotel in Shimla in 1971. [19659006] Jeetendra went to the High Court to request the cancellation of the RIP

In a judgment rendered on Monday , Judge Ajay Mohan Goel has annulled the RIP filed under Article 354 of the Indian Penal Code at the police station of Women, S himla on February 16, 2018 against Jeetendra.

The complainant had mentioned in the FIR that the actor was the son of her paternal aunt and that in January 1971, at the age of 18, the actor was Would have forced him to join him. on a movie set.

The FIR indicates that the two men drove from New Delhi to Shimla and shared a room in Shimla with two separate beds. Later, a drunken Jeetendra joined the two beds and badaulted her with the aim of scandalizing her modesty, the FIR mentions.

The High Court's judgment indicates that the cancellation of the FIR had been requested on the grounds that "the alleged incident dates back to January 1971 and as there is a disproportionate delay in the filing of the FIR and that 'no explanation explains this excessive delay in the registration of the offending FIR, it should be canceled and set aside, the registration of FIR raises serious doubts about the veracity of the allegations because it loses the advantage of the spontaneity and danger of the introduction of the color version, the exaggerated narrative or the story invented as a result of deliberations and consultations. "

in his application, the complainant had filed the RIP through a lawyer by sending him a copy by the US Such an act after a delay of more than four decades after the alleged incident could be due to the fact that, even though the family of the actor owned a large press house, the complainant's daughter was not taken for a role for which she had auditioned

Noting that there were no "sufficient grounds to bring an action against the applicant", the court quashed the FIR.