Vinesh Phogat stated on Thursday that section 144 has been implemented by the police at Rajghat in Delhi, preventing the wrestlers from holding a news conference.
Indian wrestler Vinesh Phogat, who has won medals at the World Championships and the Commonwealth Games, claimed on Thursday that the police in Delhi have imposed Section 144 at Rajghat and prevented the wrestlers from holding a news conference. A news conference will be conducted by the wrestlers on Thursday, according to India’s top grappler, Vinesh Phogat. A press conference will be conducted at Raj Ghat in Delhi at 12:30 pm, according to a tweet by Vinesh. Vinesh announced the press conference on Twitter, along with Bajrang Punia and Sakshi Malik.
Greetings to all. We’re hosting a press conference at Raj Ghat in Delhi tomorrow at 12:30. Vinesh penned “Jai Hind” in her tweet.
She now claims that section 144 has been implemented by the police at the event location and press conferences are not permitted. She added that the next news conference’s location and timing would be decided.
“At Rajghat, the police have implemented Section 144 and prevented us from holding a press conference. Will soon decide on the date and location of the next press conference,” Vinesh tweeted.
As a result of the harsh criticism they received from wrestlers, they finally broke their silence by participating in a joint live session on Facebook and responding to the claims made by wrestler Antim Panghal over their exclusion from the trials for the Asian Games in Hangzhou.
During the live session, Vinesh responded to Antim’s claims by stating, “We are not against the trials. Antim is not to blame. She’s too little to comprehend. She is positioned appropriately. She is defending her right, and we are defending our right. But we are correct.
After receiving an exemption from the trials and straight admittance into the squad in their respective weight divisions by the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) ad hoc committee, both wrestlers responded to the accusations levelled against them.
Through a video message, wrestler Antim Panghal questioned the exemption accorded to wrestlers Bajrang Punia and Vinesh Phogat for direct entry into the Asian Games in 2023.
The Delhi High Court also rejected the wrestlers Antim Panghal and Sujeet Kalkal’s petitions challenging the exemption of wrestlers Bajrang Punia and Vinesh Phogat for direct entry into the Asian Games in 2023.
Notably, the lawyer for BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan argued on Wednesday that hugging or touching a lady without sexual intent is not a crime in the sexual harassment case.
The counsel also testified before Rouse Avenue Court on the issue of jurisdiction and limitations in the case. He claims the allegations are out of time.
ACMM Harjeet Singh Jaspal heard the arguments given by lawyer Rajiv Mohan, counsel for Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh.
The case has been set for further hearings on Thursday.
This case was opened when women wrestlers filed a complaint. Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and Vinod Tomar were charged by the Delhi police.
According to Advocate Rajiv Mohan, the chargesheet was filed on the basis of claims made by six wrestlers.
The attorney stated that Section 218 of the CRPC requires a separate chargesheet for each offence.
He also objected to the matter’s jurisdiction. He contended that jurisdiction and limitation arguments can be heard at the charge stage.
According to the attorney, “if we take these allegations, Indian jurisdiction only lies in three of these allegations.”
Section 188 CrPC contains an unambiguous prohibition. This court will not have jurisdiction over any claims or offences committed outside of India, Advocate Rajiv Mohan stated.
He argued that the Delhi court has jurisdiction.
The location of the investigation and trial is specified in the CrPC. He argued that inside India, territorial jurisdiction is based on the location of the incidents, unless it is a case of a continuous offence.
Meanwhile, he claimed that crimes such as outraging modesty, rape, and murder cannot be classified as continuing offences. These are minor violations, he added.
He further claimed that two of the violations are related to Ashoka Road and Siri Fort. Siri Fort’s only offence is embracing.
Furthermore, he claimed that suddenly contacting a lady without criminal force or sexual intent is not a crime.
Advocate Rajiv Mohan also addressed the issue of delay in the complaint, and hence the limitation. He argued that the complaint is time-barred, with no statement to overcome the statute of limitations….”saying I was worried about my career is not a reasonable ground to overcome the bar.”
He went on to explain that wrestling is a male-dominated sport with few female coaches. If a coach hugs a player in joy after a victory, it cannot be considered an offence.
On the issue of jurisdiction, the lawyer stated that if we look at the complainant and their charges, all seven allegations are seen in India. There are three in Delhi, Bellary, and Lucknow.
The court has extraterritorial jurisdiction under Section 4 of the CrPC. Section 4 of Section 188 CrPC, on the other hand, is barred.
The court cannot try the charges committed outside India because of the lack of sanction under Section 188 CrPC, the attorney contended.
He also argued that, in light of this, the complainant’s single accusation of Mongolia cannot be tried in India.
On the basis of an occurrence in Bellary, Karnataka, he stated that the site of inquiry or trial from sections 176 to 188 crpc stipulates which trial should take place where.
He also argued that if the offence is a continuing one, it can be prosecuted wherever it is done. However, molestation, rape, and other such felonies are transient in nature. He contended that the offences of insulting modesty and employing criminal force could not be made into ongoing felonies.
Section 188 of the Criminal Procedure Code states that an offence committed outside of India cannot be tried. The counsel contended that the case should be tried in Bellary and Lucknow courts for crimes committed there.
He also brought up the issue of the complaint’s late submission. The complaint was filed on April 23, and the violations occurred in 2017 and 2018. Siri Fort is accused of embracing without making any sexual moves.
It was also argued that if the stage had been before 2013, just 354 would have applied, but after 2013, two sections were added, and the Supreme Court stated that a specific clause (354A) IPC would prevail. The attorney contended that touching did not represent criminal force or assault.
“There are no statements from the complainant in the chargesheet.” These cosmetic reasons would not hold that I was in danger. “If you’re moving freely and then don’t come forward for 5 years, saying you’re under threat isn’t a valid explanation,” he argued.
The event is such, and a male coach hugging a player out of anxiety is not an offence.
Hugging without any sexual advances and is of 2017 and 2018, and the offence of touching is forbidden under Section 468 Crpc, and there are no reasons for Section 473 Crpc, the counsel said.
The chargesheet makes no mention of the offence. The trial cannot continue until the 239 stage is completed, he added.
He further said that prior to the investigation, the sports ministry conducted an investigation. The complaint was unsubstantiated.
He cited a High Court ruling from 2023, which stated that if an issue is presented before a sexual harassment committee and the complaint is not corroborated, the accused cannot be tried on the basis of the allegation.
