Cuttack: The Orissa high court on Thursday stayed the execution of the non-bailable warrant (NBW) issued against outgoing MP and actor
Anubhav Mohanty in a 2020 case relating to charges of cruelty and insulting the modesty of a woman brought against him by his ex-wife Varsha Priyadarshini.
On May 13, a special court issued the NBW against Anubhav directing the inspector-in-charge of Purighat police station in Cuttack to execute the arrest warrant.
The warrant was issued after Anubhav failed to appear before the judicial magistrate first class court dealing with cases against MPs and MLAs for the second time for framing of charges in the case.
The HC has kept his plea for hearing on July 8. Justice BP Routray is hearing the plea filed by Anubhav challenging the NBW.
Senior advocate Pitambar Acharya made submissions on Anubhav’s behalf.
Varsha had lodged a complaint against Anubhav and his two aides — Sujit Dalei and Khagendra Prasad Sahoo — at Purighat police station alleging that they had locked her up in a room in his house at Nandi Sahi in Cuttack on December 18, 2020.
The alleged incident occurred when Anubhav and Varsha were fighting a battle in court for divorce.
A case was registered against Anubhav on December 19, 2020 .
Along with that, a chargesheet naming the actor-turned politician as prime accused under Sections 498 A (cruelty), 09 (insulting modesty of woman),341 (wrongful restraint), 294 (use of obscene language) and 506 (criminal intimidation) was filed on December 18, 2023.
The judicial magistrate first class court then fixed May 10 for framing of charges in the case and summons were issued to Anubhav.
However, Anubhav failed to appear on that day and again on May 13 and NBW was issued.
We also published the following articles recently
NBW against actor-neta in 2020 cruelty caseSpecial court in Cuttack issued a non-bailable arrest warrant against ex-MP Anubhav Mohanty in a 2020 case by Varsha Priyadarshini. Court fixed May 23 for framing charges after his continued absence from hearing. Prosecutor objected to a discharge petition, citing prima facie evidence by investigating officer. Presiding judge rejected the petition, avoiding a mini trial due to sufficient evidence.