Delhi Court Orders Report on Rosy Sexual Assault FIR Against ACP Vivek Bhagat

• Independent journalist Rosy sought an FIR against Delhi Police ACP Vivek Bhagat for alleged sexual assault during a protest.
• Rosy's plea to the Delhi court followed a month of police inaction on her complaint.
• JMFC Kautuk Bhardwaj ordered Delhi Police to submit a "point-wise" action taken report and investigate if a cognisable offence occurred.
• The court also mandated the preservation of all CCTV and bodycam footage related to the incident within strict timelines.
• Police must file a compliance report on footage preservation within one week, with the next hearing scheduled for December.

This proactive measure by the court is designed to prevent the loss or tampering of critical evidence that could be instrumental in establishing the facts of the sexual assault complaint.

Independent journalist Rosy recently brought a plea before a Delhi court, seeking the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against Delhi Police officer Vivek Bhagat, an Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP). The journalist alleges that she was sexually assaulted by Bhagat during a protest organized against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. This legal action follows a significant delay, as Rosy stated to the court that the Delhi Police had failed to register the FIR for over a month after she initially filed her complaint regarding the incident.

The complaint highlights a concerning period of inaction by the police force in addressing a serious allegation against one of its own officers. The court's intervention was sought after the journalist's repeated attempts to have her sexual assault complaint formally documented and investigated appeared to be unsuccessful. This situation underscores the challenges individuals can face when seeking official redress for alleged misconduct by law enforcement personnel.

In response to Rosy's plea, Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Kautuk Bhardwaj issued a directive to the Delhi Police on Tuesday, demanding a comprehensive "point-wise" action taken report. This report is specifically required to detail whether Rosy had indeed filed a complaint and what, if any, steps had been taken by the police in response to it. The court's order emphasizes the need for transparency and accountability in the police's handling of the matter.

Furthermore, the court explicitly instructed the police to ascertain whether their investigation or inquiry had revealed the commission of any cognisable offence by ACP Vivek Bhagat. Should such an offence be identified, the police are mandated to report on whether an FIR has subsequently been registered and to provide an update on the current status of that investigation. This directive aims to ensure that the process of determining culpability and initiating legal proceedings is not unduly delayed or obstructed.

A particularly crucial aspect of the court's order involves the preservation of vital evidence. JMFC Kautuk Bhardwaj notably directed the Delhi Police to secure all relevant CCTV and bodycam footage pertinent to the alleged incident. Recognizing the time-sensitive nature of digital evidence, the court stipulated that the Station House Officer (SHO) concerned must take all necessary steps within three days of receiving the order to preserve CCTV footage from the incident location, along with any other digital evidence, including footage from body cameras.

This proactive measure by the court is designed to prevent the loss or tampering of critical evidence that could be instrumental in establishing the facts of the sexual assault complaint. The court further mandated that a compliance report detailing the preservation of this footage must be filed within one week. This strict timeline underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that a thorough and fair investigation can proceed, free from concerns about missing or compromised evidence.

This Delhi court ruling carries significant weight, particularly in cases involving allegations of misconduct against police officers and instances of alleged police inaction. By compelling the Delhi Police to provide a detailed report and actively investigate the sexual assault complaint against ACP Vivek Bhagat, the court has demonstrated a firm stance on judicial oversight. It highlights the judiciary's role as a crucial check on law enforcement, especially when victims report difficulties in having their complaints formally addressed.

The explicit order for CCTV preservation and bodycam footage is a critical precedent, reinforcing the importance of digital evidence in modern investigations and ensuring its integrity from the outset. This case serves as a reminder that courts can and will intervene to ensure that allegations of cognisable offences are properly investigated, even when they involve members of the police force. The next hearing in December will likely shed more light on the police's compliance with these directives and the progress of the investigation.

Lawyers representing victims of alleged police misconduct should note the court's proactive stance in compelling police to investigate and preserve evidence, particularly when an FIR is not promptly registered. This case provides a procedural example for seeking judicial intervention to ensure accountability and evidence integrity, including specific orders for CCTV and bodycam footage preservation.

Source: Original reporting via legal news source.