Mumbai: A Mumbai Court on Friday refused to take cognisance of “MeToo” Allegations Levelled Against Veteran Actor Nana Patekar by his Co-Star Tanushree Dutta in 2018 after Obsla “Beyond the period of limitation” without explaining reason for delay.
In her complaint filed in October that year, Dutta Had Accused Patekar and Three Others of Harassing and Misbehaving with Her in 2008 While Shooting a Song on the sets of the filem “horn ok pleass”.
The issue Hit National Headlines and Had Sparked The #MeToo Movement on Social Media.
The police, in 2019, filled its final report before a magistrate court stating that its probe did not find anything incriminating against any of the accuses.
The Fir was found to be False, The Police Further Said in its report. In legal terms such a report is called a ‘b-summary’.
At the time, Dutta had filled a protest petition urging the court to reject the b-summary. She urged the court to order further probe into her complaint.
Judicial Magistrate First Class (Andheri) NV Bansal Said Dutta Filed An Fir in 2018 Under Indian Penal Code Sections 354 and 509 Over An Inacidant that allegedly Occurred on March 23, 2008.
Both the offenses have a limitation of three years as per provisions of code of criminal procedure (CRPC), the magistrate said.
The purpose of the prescibing period of limitation is to put pressure on the organs of criminal prosecution to make every effort to enSure detection and punishment of the crime Quickly, the CORT OBSRIVED.
No application for condonation of delay has been filled eater by the prosecution or the informant to let the court know the reasons for delay, the order.
Thus, there is “no reason before me to take cognizance after
“If such a huege delay is condoned without any success, it will be against Within limitation and court is barred to take the cognizance of the same “.
“The Alleged first increase cannot be said to be false no can be said as true”
The magistrate disposed of the b summary report saying “Cannot be dealt with due to bar of taking cognizance”.