Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
A Special court in Mumbai, on Monday remanded senior corporate official Vikas Sachdeva (39) for two days police custody blamed for sexually assaulting a 17-year-old actress on board an airplane. The actress was with her mom in business class on a Delhi-Mumbai Vistara flight on Saturday when the incident occured. Sachdeva, a co passenger, seated in 2F, directly behind the on-screen character (1F), was blamed for setting his foot on her armrest and rubbing her back and neck. Outside the Dindoshi court, his wife Divya, said that he was "honest; a family man".
Sachdeva, works in an entertainment organization, has been accused of 'sexual assault' under the stringent Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act, culpable with 3-5 years' detainment, and 'sexual assault' under the IPC's section 354. The debate has been once again started as to what kind of touch can be termed as amounting to sexual assault.
In Dindoshi court on Monday, the prosecutor Munna Inamdar looked for 14 days' custody and stated that "He intentionally rubbed her back and neck. She shouted at him to sit properly, however he continued with it." Arguing for Sachdeva, advocate Harminder Anand stated that the on-screen actress and her mom never complained to crew or airport authorities about the same. Her Instagram account demonstrates that his left foot was on the window and doesn't specify anything about his right foot. Remand application specifies his left foot being on the armrest and the right foot being scoured on the back and neck. On the off chance that a resting man puts his leg on an armrest, it's not sexual assault." The judge observed that the "minor victim" has "crossed 17 years of age". She noticed Anand's contentions that there were "no assertions about touch of body parts as said under Section 7 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. Anand contended that Section 7 has been wrongly connected. He said the section 7 defines ‘sexual assault’ as an offense where specific private parts are touched, and not neck and back as the police say. "The FIR doesn't charge that body parts specified in the Act were touched," he said. "There is no affirmation of 'sexual intent'." The prosecutor disproved, saying, "With his leg he touched (the actor's) neck and shoulder, showing indecency and sexual intention." The police said they must "investigate to check whether Sachdeva has committed sexual assault on minors earlier".
86540
103860
630
114
59824