New Delhi:After the new allegations made by Shankar Mishra, accused of urinating on a woman on Air India Flight that he did not commit the offence and the complainant herself could have peed on her own seat, the complainant issued a statement stating that accused has adopted a campaign of spreading misinformation and falsities with the intent of further harassing the victim.
"Accused, instead of being remorseful for the utterly disgusting act committed by him, has adopted a campaign of spreading misinformation and falsities with the intent of further harassing the Victim." "Needless to state, the allegations are completely false and concocted and by their very nature are disparaging and derogatory.
The said allegations are also in complete contradiction and a complete volte-face of the statements and the pleaded case of the accused in his Bail Application", said the statement. The statement issued further stated that the endeavour of the victim throughout has been to ensure that institutional changes are made so that no individual has to go through the horrendous experience that the victim suffered.
The Complainant through her Lawyer Ankur Mehindro stated that it has been brought to our knowledge that certain scurrilous and defamatory allegations have been made on behalf of the accused during a court hearing.
On Friday, during the hearing, the accused through senior lawyer Ramesh Gupta submitted, "The complainant woman's seat was blocked. It wasn't possible for him (Mishra) to go there. The woman has a problem with incontinence. She urinated on herself. She is a Kathak dancer, 80 per cent of kathak dancers have this issue."
0Raising questions over the Delhi Police investigation, senior advocate Ramesh Gupta submitted that there must be someone else. "She herself urinated. The seating system was such that no one could go to her seat. The passenger sitting behind the complainant did not make any such complaint," he added.
After noting the submissions made before the session court by the Delhi Police to investigate was the accused person was intoxicated before boarding the flight or not, the Additional Sessions Judge said: "The appeal doesn't seem to have been made before the magistrate court. It is not appropriate to decide on an order based on submissions not made before the magistrate. The ground seems to be widely worded and the magistrate can't be expected to apply his mind to all possible situations.