[False sexual harassment allegations] Delhi High Court dismisses Sarvjeet Singh's plea for inquiry against Jasleen Kaur

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea by Sarvjeet Singh seeking criminal inquiry against Jasleen Kaur, the St Stephens College student who had accused him of sexual harassment and abuse at a traffic signal in Delhi in 2015 [Sarvjeet Singh v State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr]..The incident had gathered much media attention and Singh was finally acquitted of all charges in 2019 after the court gave him the benefit of doubt.He then moved the trial court seeking criminal inquiry against Kaur for allegedly giving false information and evidence. However, his application and appeal were dismissed by the lower courts.Singh challenged these orders before the High Court arguing that courts below had erred in passing the orders without considering material facts and circumstances and proceeded on incorrect application of law..Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain, however, held the order passed by the trial court and the appellate court have rightly held that mere acquittal of Singh, after giving benefit of doubt, does not attract Section 195 (fabricating false evidence) of the Indian Penal Code and other offences or the preliminary inquiry as contemplated under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).“The trial Court while acquitting the petitioner, has not given any finding that the respondent no. 2 has made false statement on oath during the trial before the Court,” Justice Jain held..However, the Court said that Singh’s anxiety can be very well understood as Kaur had published the incident in the media which might have caused loss of reputation to him.But mere loss of reputation is not sufficient to attract the provisions under Section 340 CrPC and Singh is at liberty to file a case for defamation, the Court added.“The present petition is devoid of merit, hence, dismissed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to initiate appropriate legal proceedings for the defamation alleged to have been caused by the respondent no. 2 towards the petitioner by lodging the present FIR in accordance with law or by initiating any other remedy as provided under law. The application under section 340 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable under the given facts and circumstances of the case.”.Advocate Amish Aggarwala appeared for Singh.State was represented by advocate Karan Jeet Rai Sharma. .[Read Order]