Sajjan Jindal was ‘framed’ in rape case. Mumbai Police closure report cites malicious intent

Report says complainant failed to provide evidence to substantiate claims & did not appear before the magistrate to record her statement despite being issued multiple notices.

File photo of Sajjan Jindal | ANI

Mumbai: “Lack of evidence”, “delay in filing a case”, “malicious intent” — these are some of the reasons the Mumbai Police has cited while seeking to close the investigation into the rape case against industrialist Sajjan Jindal.

The Bandra-Kurla Complex police station filed a ‘B-summary’ closure report in the Metropolitan Magistrate Court Saturday. ThePrint has accessed a copy.

The primary reason cited for the closure report is that the complainant failed to provide evidence to substantiate her claims. She also did not appear before the magistrate to record her statement despite multiple notices being served to her, the report states.

“During the investigation, it was revealed that the victim filed the complaint much later after the alleged crime happened. She has still not submitted any proof or evidence to prove the crime. Despite reminding multiple times, she failed to appear before the court to record her statement under 164 CrPC procedure (sic),” it adds.

In his statement, Jindal, who is chairman and managing director of the JSW Group, said the case was filed to extort money from him.

“The allegations against me are baseless and done with malicious intent to extort money from me,” reads his statement, quoted in the report.

The case against Jindal was lodged in December last year, on the complaint of a 30-year-old woman, who alleged that he sexually assaulted her for two years between October 2021 and January 2022. The complainant claims she had visited the police station multiple times but her complaint was filed and FIR registered only after the Bombay High Court advised the police to do so.

The FIR was registered at the BKC police station in Mumbai on 13 December under IPC sections 376 (rape), 354 (outraging modesty of a woman) and 506 (criminal intimidation).

What the closure report says

According to the police, they had found during their investigation that Jindal was not present at the location when one of the alleged crimes took place.

“Also, during our investigation we found out that on the said date of 24/12/2021 when the victim said she was molested at hotel Taj Lands End, the accused was not there in the hotel, as was revealed by the witnesses from the hotel. And so it was found out that the said crime against the woman did not take place. And in short, what we found out in our investigation was that she tried to frame him. And that is why we are accepting the B-Summary report,” the closure report states.

The report was filed after speaking to multiple witnesses including Jindal.

According to Jindal, he met the complainant and her brother at MP Praful Patel’s son’s wedding in Jaipur in 2021. After a brief interaction, Jindal asked the woman’s brother — who works in Dubai as a property consultant — to send him a proposal for a residence-cum-guest house in Dubai. And he left after clicking a picture with them.

Then, he met the woman on 27 December that same year, at his mansion on Mumbai’s Peddar Road where he was already in a meeting with the CEO of JSW Realty.

“During this meeting, an office attendant brought the woman to my office where she showed me the proposal for a property in Dubai. I reviewed it and expressed dissatisfaction and asked her to give me more options. Shortly, she left the mansion and I resumed my meeting,” said the report, quoting from the industrialist’s statement.

The next meeting took place on 5 January, 2022, where the complainant visited his JSW Centre office in BKC where she again presented the proposal. But here too, Jindal was not happy with the proposal and told her that if there are no better options, then “there is no need for further meetings”.

Upon hearing this, the woman requested Jindal if he can take a photo with her and Jindal claims he asked his secretary to click the picture, and then she left.

“After that, I never had any contact with the victim and even blocked her number, as I normally do after any business deal is concluded,” Jindal said in his statement.

In the FIR, the woman had claimed that she also met Jindal on 8 October, 2021, in Dubai but after speaking with witnesses, the police say they found that Jindal was in Alibaug at his Dolvi plant where he had gone by helicopter. “So the victim’s claims are wrong.”

Further, between 22 and 24 December, 2021, Jindal was in New Delhi, the investigation revealed, says the closure report, from where he returned to Mumbai in the evening to visit his BKC office. Post that, he attended a wedding with his wife.

But the complainant had in her FIR claimed that he had visited her at the Taj lands Hotel in Mumbai. Upon checking with the hotel staff, the police found out that the complainant was alone there, the report states.

She has also claimed that on 26 December, Jindal took her out in his car. But Jindal, in his testimony said that that day his wife was feeling unwell and was even showing Covid-19 symptoms, so he decided to stay at home with her and avoided a wedding function that evening.

“I am a prominent figure in the society and have been married for 40 years. I have three children and seven grandchildren and so such misconduct as alleged is not appropriate on my behalf, and I am aware of it,” Jindal said.

“The complainant has contacted me using various mobile numbers. Also, based on the information provided to me, she has not obtained any educational degrees abroad or film studies. Her claims to show that she is a prominent figure were only to get close to me and extort money from me,” he further said in his statement.

The allegations

The complainant alleged that Jindal also tried to sexually assault her on 5 January, 2022, at his BKC office. A few weeks later on 24 January, he again allegedly tried to rape her at his office’s penthouse bathroom, making her leave the penthouse immediately.

He later apologised and suggested marriage, she alleged. But the police in their statement said that the office was made of glass, so if the claims were true, there would have been witnesses.

The police said they have sent multiple reminders to the complainant regarding the court dates by email and even tried contacting her through phone.

“But her phone remained switched off. She later informed via her lawyer that she cannot be present to record her statement as her mother is unwell. And so we extended the dates between February 5 to February 9. But again she did not appear and did not present any evidence in her possession, as claimed by her,” the police said in the closure report.

(Edited by Gitanjali Das)