- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Actress Tanushree Dutta To File Petition In Bombay High Court After Nana Patekar Gets Clean Chit In Sexual Harassment Case
[ By Bobby Anthony ]Bollywood actress Tanushree Dutta plans to file a writ petition in the Bombay High Court after the Mumbai police closed the sexual harassment case against Nana Patekar, according to her lawyer Nitin Satpute.Earlier, the Mumbai police had filed a ‘B’ classification summary report claiming “lack of evidence”.The Oshiwara police station in Mumbai filed a ‘B’...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Bollywood actress Tanushree Dutta plans to file a writ petition in the Bombay High Court after the Mumbai police closed the sexual harassment case against Nana Patekar, according to her lawyer Nitin Satpute.
Earlier, the Mumbai police had filed a ‘B’ classification summary report claiming “lack of evidence”.
The Oshiwara police station in Mumbai filed a ‘B’ summary report in the Tanushree Dutta-Nana Patekar sexual harassment case and gave Nana Patekar a clean chit, claiming that there was “no evidence” against him in the case.
Incidentally, a 'B’ summary report is filed when the police do not find any evidence against the accused in order to file a charge sheet and seek trial.
However, actress Tanushree Dutta’s lawyer stated that he is yet to receive any official information from the Oshiwara police station about the classification of offence (summary report) from the police on her behalf.
He stated that any ‘B or ‘C’ classification summary report is not final and could be opposed in court, adding that the court might eventually direct the Mumbai police to continue the probe into the sexual harassment case.
He stated that since the Mumbai police had allegedly acted negligently in order to protect Nana Patekar and did not allegedly record statements of several witnesses or investigate the matter properly, he would demand that the investigation be taken over by another probe agency.
It may be recalled that in September 2018, actress Tanushree Dutta had accused her then co-star Nana Patekar of sexually harassing her on the sets of the 2008 film, ‘Horn OK Pleassss’, which went on to trigger off the second wave of the #MeToo movement in India.
After the actress went public with her allegations, she filed a formal police complaint against Patekar on October, 2018 and recorded her statement.
However, Patekar denied any wrongdoing and accused the actress of lying.
Later, his lawyer sent a legal notice to actress Tanushree Dutta and also demanded an apology from her.