Home NEWSCITY TALKS On monday Mumbai court discharged Shilpa Shetty on Richard Gere publicly kissing case

On monday Mumbai court discharged Shilpa Shetty on Richard Gere publicly kissing case

by Kolkata Today

On monday Mumbai court discharged Shilpa Shetty had been accused of obscenity and indecency in an incident where co-accused Richard Gere had publicly kissed her. The incident happened during a promotional event in Rajasthan in 2007. A total of three cases were filed in 2007 against Shilpa for publicly kissing the Hollywood star and AIDS awareness campaigner.

After perusing the complaint that gave rise to the case, the Metropolitan Magistrate Ketaki Chavan deduced that the actress was a victim of the element of the alleged act by Gere.


Once the police report and documents were presented, the Magistrate was satisfied that the charges against her were groundless.


Not a single element of any of the allegations being satisfied in the complaint. Moreover, none of the papers 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).


An FIR was registered against Shilpa Shetty and Richard Gere after a complaint was filed against them for allegedly sexually molesting a minor girl at a hotel in India’s northern state of Rajasthan.


The FIR booked the accused under Sections 292, 293, 294 (obscenity) of the Indian Penal Code, along with provisions of the Information Technology and Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act.

Read More: Beachy Vibes from Katrina Kaif from her new Maldives pics

The actress filed for discharge under Section 239 (discharge after considering police report and documents) and Section 245 (discharging after considering evidence) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Shilpa Shetty’s plea to transfer the case to Mumbai was allowed by the Supreme Court in 2017. The complaint and the transfer case was being heard by the Metropolitan Magistrate at Ballard Pier, Mumbai.


Her application under Section 239 was allowed, but her application under 245 was rejected as the summons triable case had no provision for discharge.

Related Articles

Leave a Comment