Allahabad HC allows UP govt’s plea to withdraw case against Brij Bhushan

In a significant legal development, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has granted the Uttar Pradesh government's request to withdraw a criminal case against former BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, the Deccan Herald reported.

The issue stemmed from allegations that Singh violated a restraint order by holding a public meeting in 2014, leading to charges under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code for disobeying an order promulgated by a public servant. He was accused of violating Section 144 of CrPC and holding a public meeting.

Despite a charge sheet being filed, the state government sought to withdraw the case in 2020. However, a Gonda court initially rejected this plea, prompting Singh to challenge the decision in the high court. Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan, presiding over the matter, approved the withdrawal application filed by the public prosecutor, effectively dismissing the charges against Singh.

The ruling provides substantial relief to Singh, who has been entangled in multiple legal issues. Notably, he faces separate allegations of sexual harassment from several female wrestlers, including prominent athletes like Sakshi Malik and Vinesh Phogat. These allegations led to prolonged protests and legal proceedings, with Singh consistently denying any wrongdoing. The withdrawal of the 2014 case may influence public perception and the trajectory of the ongoing legal battles he faces.

Notably, on 3 March, a Delhi court will resume the recording of the statement of one of the female wrestlers who accused Singh, former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) president of sexual harassment.

In January, Delhi Police opposed Singh's plea in the Delhi High Court to quash the proceedings related to the sexual harassment case.

While opposing the quashing of the case, the Delhi Police told the court that the trial against the BJP leader is in progress.

Singh had sought the quashing of the first information report (FIR) and the proceedings, claiming that it was "false" and "frivolous".

The high court's decision underscores the complexities involved in legal proceedings against political figures and highlights the discretionary power of state governments in pursuing or withdrawing criminal cases.

With IANS inputs