Survivor said she was uncomfortable recording her statement, as there was no female cop present; this led to miscommunication and the FIR left out important charges against the accused
An air hostess-turned-actress has raised questions over the police’s sensitivity and efforts in rape cases, alleging that there were many shortcomings in the procedure when she had filed a rape complaint with the Versova police earlier this year.
Amit Sinoy allegedly raped the survivor and forced her to perform oral sex after blackmailing her with a sex video
The 30-year-old is a former air hostess who had settled in Punjab with her husband. Three years ago, the couple divorced and she began working as an actress in Punjabi films. She would often visit Mumbai for shootings, and on one such trip in 2013, she met Amit Sinoy, the son of a Kolkata businessman, with whom she then had a relationship.
The 30-year-old actress is unhappy with the way the police handled her complaint and will be writing to the police commissioner about it
She found out Sinoy was married, however, and demanded that he get a divorce and then marry her. She refused any sexual relations with him until he married her, so Sinoy took her to a temple and married her secretly in July, 2014. Soon enough, the survivor began to insist that he legally register the marriage, which is when Sinoy posted naked pictures of her on social media websites.
Although she left him after this incident, in January, Sinoy contacted her again and showed her a video of the two of them having sex. He told her he would post the video online and defame her unless she met him. So, on January 20, she went to meet him at a hotel in Mumbai, where he allegedly raped her and also forced her to perform oral sex.
The survivor then approached the Versova police station on January 28. According to her, however, there was no policewoman present there while recording the statement, and this made her uncomfortable. The woman added that because of this, she was unable to clearly explain exactly what had happened in the hotel room that day.
The complaint was registered, but once again, the survivor felt at a disadvantage as it was in Marathi, and she did not realise that the police had failed to mention either the oral sex (Section 377 unnatural sex) or that she had been blackmailed with a sex video. It was only later, when she was sent for a medical examination that she was able to open up to the doctor, a woman.
The doctor noted down all the details in her report. Despite this, the police did not alter their complaint. “I do not understand Marathi and could not read the FIR. I found out much later that the complaint did not mention that Sinoy had taken a video of me and had threatened to make it public,” the woman told mid-day, adding that she will write to Commissioner Rakesh Maria about the issue.
Asked why was the unnatural sex charge was not added, the investigating officer, API Krishnarao Nikam, said that the survivor had not mentioned it. When mid-day pointed out that she was uncomfortable divulging the details to the male officers, Senior Police Inspector Ravindranath Pawar said, “There should have been a woman police officer present while recording the FIR. I will look into it and ask the investigating officer what went wrong.”