news details |
|
|
| Sis-in-law takes IAS officer to court for a cuff at wrong place | | | Early Times Reporter
Jammu | Oct 20
A senior civil servant presently serving at the Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board has landed in a soup as his influential sister-in-law has dragged him into a litigation on charges of sexual molestation.
Additional Chief Executive Officer of SMVD Shrine Board, Puneet Kumar has been summoned by Delhi's metropolitan magistrate Sanjay Bansal to explain his position in the cases dating back to 2003. Kumar, who has been earning accolades for his work at the present posting, however has denied through his advocate the charges leveled by the sister-in-law.
Poornima (name withheld) married to brother of Kumar's wife belongs to an influential family of Delhi and she is allegedly being helped by a senior officer who is reportedly detractor of Kumar. Though Kumar could not be reached for his comments, according to his lawyer Mukesh Kalia, the women is making allegations out of frustration following a failed marriage.
Poornima's story however says that Kumar had slapped her on her buttock when she was alone in his room, where she had gone to retrieve her dowry items. She has also accused him of speaking to her in filthy language.
In her complaint, Madhu said on the evening of September 1, 2003 she went to Kumar's official residence at Tilak Lane along with a female police officer to collect her dowry items, which had been kept by Kumar. The search was reportedly conducted till 9.00 pm.
During the search, when the complainant was alone in a room, the accused taking benefit of this, entered the room and slapped on her buttock, Madhu alleged.
The accused also reportedly abused her and caught hold of her dupatta and removed it from her body. He also made obscene gestures towards her and when she shouted for help, the accused allegedly came in front of her and prevented her from moving towards the door.
"There is no substance in her complaint. The case has been investigated earlier and was closed by the police that found her statement could not be corroborated with any independent witnesses," says Kumar's counsel Mukesh Kalia.
"She has filed a plethora of cases against me in a very systematic manner after her marriage failed. She is from a very influential family and she was being helped by a very senior officer in doing so. I have never even harassed my in-laws for dowry, why would I harass her," Kumar is reported to have told the court in his defence. Madhu is married to the brother of Kumar's wife.
In a separate case prior to her molestation complaint, Madhu had accused Kumar of harassing her for dowry and withholding her belongings at his place. The defence said the molestation case is an outshoot of the same. Earlier, the police had filed a cancellation report in the case.
It was, however, reconsidered after Madhu filed a protest petition.
"Why would a woman from a decent family file a false case of molestation against anyone? The court is taking cognisance only after going through the records," refuted KK Manan, counsel for the complainant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
