Richard Gere kissing incident: Shilpa Shetty discharged by Mumbai court in obscenity case

A Mumbai court on Monday discharged Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty in a case of obscenity filed against her after Hollywood actor Richard Gere had publicly kissed her at a promotional event in Rajasthan in 2007..After perusing the complaint that gave rise to the case, Metropolitan Magistrate Ketaki Chavan opined that Shetty seemed to have been a victim of the act by the Gere, who is the main accused in the case. “Not a single element of any of the alleged offence is being satisfied in the complaint. Moreover, none of the paper annexed with the final report discloses act of present accused so as to bring her within the purview of Section 34 of IPC (common intention),” the Court said.After considering the police report and documents presented, the Magistrate was satisfied that the charges against Shetty were groundless and hence she was discharged from the offences..After the incident, a complaint was filed before a Judicial Magistrate First Class in Mundawar, Rajasthan seeking registration of FIR against Shetty and Gere, which was allowed.The FIR booked the accused for offences under Sections 292, 293, 294 (obscenity) of the Indian Penal Code, along with provisions of Information Technology and Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act.Shetty’s plea to transfer the case to Mumbai was allowed by Supreme Court in 2017 after which the complaint and the transfer case came to be heard by the Metropolitan Magistrate at Ballard Pier, Mumbai..Shetty filed for discharge under Section 239 (discharge after considering police report and documents) and Section 245 (discharge after considering evidence) of the Code of Criminal Procedure through Advocate Madhukar Dalvi.Her applications stated that the accusation against her was “only that she did not protest when she was kissed by the co-accused Richard Gere” which by no stretch of imagination made her a conspirator or perpetrator to the crime.After hearing both sides, the Magistrate allowed her discharge under Section 239 but the application under Section 245 was rejected as the summons triable case had no provision for discharge.