No Purpose Served By Keeping Him In Custody At This Stage, Says Court Order Granting Bail To Brij Bhushan Singh

A Delhi court order released on Friday (July 21) stated that the allegations of sexual harassment against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, the outgoing WFI chief, were deemed "serious".

However, the court concluded that it would not serve any purpose to take him into custody at this stage.

On Thursday (July 20), the court granted regular bail to Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, who is a six-time BJP MP. The bail application of Vinod Tomar, the suspended assistant secretary of the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI), was also approved.

The observations made by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Harjeet Singh Jaspal were detailed in a nine-page order passed on Thursday. This order was made available to the public on Friday.

The judge emphasized that although the allegations in this case are serious, they are not the sole determining factor for granting bail. The judge further stated that detaining undertrial prisoners indefinitely violates Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.

Therefore, the judge concluded that at this stage, taking the accused persons into custody would serve no purpose.

The court acknowledged that Singh and Tomar were charged with sexual assault, which carried a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment. The judge also observed that the accused were not detained during the investigation and had cooperated with the authorities, as stated in the police report.

The judge emphasized that, throughout the proceedings, the Investigating Agency, represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, had not expressed any concerns about the accused individuals misusing their positions or attempting to tamper with evidence.

The judge highlighted the importance of imposing appropriate conditions to ensure that the accused individuals do not directly or indirectly approach the victims in order to influence them.

It was also observed in the order that the Additional Public Prosecutor did not oppose the bail and simply stated that it should be decided according to the directions of the Supreme Court. Further, upon inquiry, the court noted that the counsel for the complainants did not provide any specific instances of threats made to the victims.

The order further said that although the counsel expressed concerns about the accused approaching and influencing the victims in the future, no such details were presented in the present case.

The judge directed the accused to appear in court whenever summoned and prohibited them from committing any similar crimes they are suspected of.

Additionally, the accused are not allowed to leave the country without prior permission from the court.

On June 15, the Delhi Police had filed a charge sheet against the six-time MP under sections 354, 354A, 354D, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). These sections pertain to assault with intent to outrage modesty, sexual harassment, stalking, and criminal intimidation, respectively.