NEW DELHI: Outgoing WFI chief and BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh was granted regular bail by Delhi's Rouse Avenue court on Thursday in the case relating to alleged sexual harassment of women wrestlers.
Earlier, Brij Bhushan had been granted a two-day interim bail by the court on Tuesday.
The court also decided to grant bail with conditions to Vinod Tomar, the accused suspended assistant secretary of the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI), who has been charged with abetment in the case.
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Harjeet Singh Jaspal granted bail to Brij Bhusan and Vinod Tomar on bonds of Rs 25,000 each with certain conditions attached.
While granting bail to the duo, the court imposed several conditions on them, and said the accused shall not try to directly or indirectly influence the complainants or witnesses and are not permitted to leave the country without permission of the court.
The next date of hearing, set for scrutiny of documents in the case, has been set as July 28.
The case relates to six female wrestlers who had earlier lodged a complaint leveling serious charges against Brij Bhushan for alleged sexual harassment and intimidation faced by them during training camps and international competitions. In his turn, Brji Bhushan has rejected all the allegations.
Meanwhile, the Delhi Police had submitted a humongous charge sheet against the WFI chief and six-time MP on June 15 filing charges against him under sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 354A (sexual harassment), 354D (stalking) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
On the other hand, Tomar has been charged with different offences which come under IPC sections 109 (abetment of any offence, if the act abetted is committed in consequence, and where no express provision is made for its punishment), 354, 354A and 506 (criminal intimidation).
Earlier in the day, the court had reserved its order while hearing the matter of the bail applications of Singh and Tomar.
The judge had withheld the order after he heard opposing arguments, both by the counsel for the accused, those of the prosecution as well as from the representative of the complainants.
At the time of the hearing, the public prosecutor, who is representing the Delhi Police, appealed to the court to try the accused as per law and impose certain obligatory conditions if such relief was granted to the accused.
When the prosecutor was asked by the court if he was opposing the bail application, he replied that he was neither opposing nor supporting the bail, adding that the application should be dealt as per the existing law and according to the order passed by the court.
However, the counsel appearing for the complainants stated his opposition to the application, on the grounds that the accused was very influential.
“Bail should not be granted. If at all it is granted, strict conditions must be imposed. Witnesses have been approached from time to time, no threat though,” he told the court.
On the other hand, the counsel for the accused informed the court about his willingness to abide by all conditions. He informed that no threats of any kind will take place.
“He should be granted bail. I am undertaking to abide by conditions,” the defence counsel told the court. The bail was then granted.
Also Read: Supreme Court Takes Cognizance of Manipuri Women's Abuse, Seeks Government Accountability
Also Watch: