Udupi Court Documents Statements of Allegedly Filmed College Washroom Incident
A recent development in the case involving the alleged filming of two female students within the premises of Netra Jyoti Paramedical College has taken place at the Udupi Court. On Thursday, Second Additional Civil Judge S Nirmala conducted a statement recording under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) from the two students who were reportedly victims of the incident.
The incident in question occurred on July 18 and subsequently led to the suspension of the three female students involved. Notably, the victim of the alleged filming did not initiate a formal complaint. However, local authorities took action, and on July 26, a First Information Report (FIR) was lodged against the three students and the college management by the police.
The charges against the accused students include violations under Sections 509, 204, 175, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Additionally, they were charged under Section 66(e) of the Information Technology Act for the violation of privacy. It is alleged that their actions involved insulting the modesty of a woman, tampering with evidence, and failure to comply with legal obligations to produce relevant documents.
During the proceedings, the accused students secured bail in July with reference to the Supreme Court's precedent in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar. They contended that the case was politically motivated and emphasized that the affected student did not initiate the complaint against them.
Following this line of argument, the Court granted bail to the accused students. However, this was contingent upon each of them posting a personal bond of ₹20,000. This recent development adds to the ongoing legal discourse surrounding the case.
TAGS: Udupi Court Alleged Filming Female Students Washroom Incident Netra Jyoti Paramedical College Second Additional Civil Judge S Nirmala Statement Recording Section 164 CrPC Suspension FIR Charges Indian Penal Code IPC Sections 509 204 175 34 Information Technology Act Section 66(e) Violation of Privacy Bail Supreme Court Precedent Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar Political Motivation Complaint Personal Bond ₹20 000.
