In a striking development in the sexual harassment controversy involving Delhi ACP Vivek Bhagat, the Delhi Police on Wednesday registered a counter-FIR against journalist Rosy and two other people after Bhagat, lodged a complaint. The cop had earlier faced allegations of sexual harassment from female journalists who had been covering protests against the revision of electoral rolls.

ACP Bhagat, in his complaint, alleged that Rosy, who is associated with a news portal, as well as one Gajendra Singh and an unidentified person hurled casteist slurs at him. Moreover, he also alleged the trio of subjecting him to intimidation and claimed they deterred him from performing his official duty during a protest against the Election Commission of India (ECI) on October 3.

Bhagat’s complaint turned into an FIR, and was registered at the Parliament Street Police Station on Tuesday. However, the allegations in the counter-complaint are yet to be proven.

ACP alleges caste-based humiliation

The FIR reads that Bhagat was deployed for law-and-order duty at Buta Singh Roundabout in Central Delhi when the agitators attempted to march towards Jantar Mantar. The demonstration had been organised against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, following allegations pertaining to the revision of electoral rolls.

Bhagat, who reportedly serves in the Connaught Place subdivision of New Delhi district and belongs to the Scheduled Caste (SC) community, alleged that he and his operator, Constable Ravi Dahiya, heard derogatory remarks about his caste after a journalist referred to his nameplate and identity.

The ACP went on to allege that the remarks questioned how someone belonging to his caste could assume the post of an ACP. He added that the accused confronted him while he was discharging his official duties and later staged a protest outside Parliament Street police station. After Bhagat lodged a complaint, the cops invoked Sections 221, 356(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), along with Sections 3(1)(p), 3(1)(q), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in the FIR.

AAP’s Saurabh Bharadwaj calls it ‘cross-case’

Reacting to the development, Saurabh Bharadwaj, leader of the Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP) Delhi unit called the FIR an example of a cross-case case registered by the police. His ‘X’ post read, “This is a classic example of cross cases registered by police. We often see them in cases of molestation. This should be included in the syllabus of Law Colleges.”

Sexual harassment complaints under probe

The counter-FIR has surfaced amid a probe by the Delhi Crime branch into complaints filed by three women journalists, including Rosy, who alleged sexual harassment and manhandling by cops while covering the October 3 protest.

Rosy specifically accused Bhagat of touching her inappropriately and pushing her while she was recording a protestor’s detention. The allegations have not been verified independently, and a probe into the incident is underway.

While Bhagat has denied the allegations, the crime branch unit is probing the case.

Additional charge withheld pending inquiry

After landing in the controversy, Bhagat’s administrative responsibilities were affected too. The Delhi government has withheld its additional charge as Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police (ADCP) pending examination of the allegations, after he requested that he not be assigned the responsibility until the matter was completely probed.

The government clarified that the temporary posting arrangement had been initiated before the controversy unfolded and that the order would be modified in the case.