New Delhi, Nov 1 (IANS) Chandrashekhar, MP from Nagina and President of Azad Samaj Party (Kanshi Ram), got a big relief on Saturday as a Delhi court rejected a woman doctor’s plea seeking direction to Delhi Police to book the politician for her alleged sexual abuse.

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Neha Mittal rejected doctor Rohini Ghavari’s application seeking directions to the SHO, PS-IGI Airport, New Delhi, to register an FIR in the matter.

“This Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant/complainant has not complied with the mandatory provision of Section 173(4) BNSS. As a result, the present application is not maintainable and hence, dismissed,” said ACJM Mittal.

Switzerland-based doctor Ghavari alleged that she was subjected to a series of heinous offences by the accused, including repeated sexual assault under the false promise of marriage, criminal intimidation, voyeurism, stalking, cheating, misuse of technology and threats to her life and dignity.

The doctor alleged that in October 2021, upon her first arrival in India, she was taken by the accused to Pullman International Hotel, Aerocity, New Delhi, where, against her wishes and consent, she was ravished and was kept confined in the hotel for several hours under the false assurance of marriage.

She alleged that she lodged her complaint with Police Station-IGI Airport, New Delhi, but the police failed to register the FIR and instead transferred her complaint to PS-Parliament Street.

Doctor Ghavari said in the court application that the non-action on the part of the police officials amounted to dereliction of their duty.

The court, while rejecting her plea, said, “Perusal of the application u/s 175(3) BNSS and affidavit annexed therewith shows that it has nowhere been averred by the complainant that after inaction of the concerned SHO, she approached the DCP with her complaint.”

“The same is a mandatory requirement for filing an application u/s 175(3) BNSS. The complainant is required to state on oath not only the facts/allegations of the case but also specify that she approached the police officials u/s 154(1) and 154(3) Cr.P.C./173(4) BNSS,” said ACJM Neha Mittal.

The court said, “The complainant is required to state on oath not only the facts/allegations of the case but also specify that she approached the police officials u/s 154(1) and 154(3) Cr.P.C./173(4) BNSS.”

“Averments with respect to compliance of Section 154(3) Cr.P.C./173(4) BNSS are missing in the present application. Thus, neither any averment regarding compliance of Section 173(4) BNSS has been made in the present application nor any complaint has been sent to the concerned DCP before September 3, 2025 (date of affidavit),” said the court.

–IANS

rch/dan