Controversy Surrounding Oversight Panel In WFI Sexual Harassment Case: Delhi Police Charge-Sheet Reveals Concerns

As per the charge-sheet filed by the Delhi Police in the high-profile case, women wrestlers have raised concerns regarding the fairness of the oversight panel responsible for investigating sexual harassment allegations against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, the chief of the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI). The wrestlers have alleged that the panel exhibited bias in favor of Singh, who also holds the position of a BJP MP. The outgoing WFI chief is set to appear in a trial court following the summons issued against him, alongside the Federation's Assistant Secretary Vinod Tomar.

The six-member panel, formed by the government and headed by the esteemed Indian boxer MC Mary Kom, had submitted its report to the government; however, the report was not made publicly available. In separate statements, the complainants expressed their belief that the panel displayed partiality towards Singh. The comprehensive charge-sheet spans 1,599 pages and includes statements from 44 witnesses, along with six statements from the complainants recorded under CrPC 164, a section of the Criminal Procedure Code.

One of the complainants expressed that even though she provided her statement to the oversight committee during her visits to the Federation office, the accused would look at her with unpleasant and suggestive eyes, accompanied by inappropriate gestures that made her feel unsafe. The wrestler's statement continued that the video recording of her statement was repeatedly switched off and on, despite her request for a copy of the recording. She is concerned that her statement may not have been fully recorded and could have been altered to protect the accused.

Another complainant stated that she was included in the WFI sexual harassment committee without her consent, expressing that all national sports federations are required to have an Internal Complaints Committee. she never received any official communication notifying her of such approval, nor did she receive any communication requesting her consent to be a part of the sexual harassment committee of the Wrestling Federation of India.

The same individual who identified as a 'victim' also claimed that the oversight panel did not provide her with the requested recording. She had serious doubts that her video statement might not have been recorded in its entirety or could have been tampered with to protect the accused. Therefore, she requested a copy of the video recording. However, the members of the oversight committee flatly denied her request. The Delhi police justified their decision not to arrest the accused, citing compliance with the law by both Singh and WFI Assistant Secretary Tomar, as they participated in the investigation.

The results from the digital/electronic devices and exhibits seized and submitted to the relevant Forensic Labs are still pending and will be included in supplementary police reports. The police in the charge-sheet stated that the analysis of requested CDRs (call detail records), among other relevant data, necessary for prosecution will also be promptly submitted.