NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court said Thursday that no defendant in a sexual harassment case had the right to access the statement of a whistleblower registered by a magistrate under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure until the trial court will be aware of the charge sheet. The ruling came in a highly disputed case involving former minister Swami Chinmayanand, who had been the home of the MoS in the Vajpayee government.
A bench of Judges UU Lalit, Vineet Saran, and S Ravindra Bhat disapproved of Allahabad HC’s decision to deliver a copy of the statement of a girl registered under Section 164 CrPC to Chinmayanand, accused of sexual harassment by the plaintiff, who was a student at Shahjahanpur Law School run by the ashram led by the former minister.
The Supreme Court said: “The filing of the charge sheet alone does not entitle the accused to obtain copies of any of the relevant documents, including the statement under Section 164 of the Code. No person has the right to a copy. of the declaration recorded under Section 164 of the Code until the court approves the corresponding orders after the charge sheet is filed. ”
Like the Hathras case, which has attracted massive media coverage, the former minister’s allegation of sexual assault went viral after the girl made a post on social media accusing China of ruining the lives of many girls. Chinmayanand had dismissed the accusation as a blackmail tactic and claimed that the Rs 5 crore claim was made with the threat that non-payment would lead to ruin his reputation. The CS had learned suo motu of the incident on August 30 last year, the day the girl was traced to Dausa, Rajasthan.
The SC had ordered: “We are not expressing any opinion regarding the complaints expressed by the girl Miss A and the apprehensions of her parents. All we wish to point out is that the correction of the complaints / apprehension should be addressed in accordance with the procedure established by law. In view of the above, we directed the Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh, to constitute a task force headed by a police officer with the rank of Inspector General of Police, assisted by the Police Superintendent and a team of police officers to investigate the complaints expressed by Ms. A and regarding the apprehension expressed by Ms. A.’s parents. ”
The CS had also asked the SIT thus constituted to investigate the FIR presented by Chinmayanand on alleged blackmail and demand for extortion money and had requested the Chief Justice of Allahabad HC to supervise the investigations. The charge sheet was filed after the investigations and the defendant immediately requested the court to provide him with a copy of the plaintiff’s Section 164 CrPC statement, which was delivered by the HC to the defendant.
The woman had filed a petition challenging the HC’s decision. The court led by Judge Lalit said there was a clear procedural enunciation by the SC directing that a witness statement registered under Section 164 CrPC be delivered to the investigating officer with strict instructions not to disclose it to anyone before filing the claim. charge sheet.
.
