Content creator Elvish gets bail from Gurugram court in assault case
Gurugram, Mar 23: A Gurugram court on Saturday granted bail to Bigg Boss OTT 2 winner Elvish Yadav in a case of assault against YouTuber Sagar Thakur alias Maxtern, said police.
"The court heard the bail application and granted bail in the case. He will have to furnish a bail bond which would be submitted in the court," said his counsel, Advocate Himanshu Yadav.
The Gurugram Police had on Wednesday filed an application seeking a production warrant for Elvish Yadav, who was then lodged in Noida jail.
Judicial Magistrate First Class Harsh Kumar had ordered Elvish to appear in court on March 27, but the Noida Police reached the Gurugram court along with Elvish on Saturday.
Elvish had on Friday been granted bail by a Gautam Budh Nagar court, said police.
When he was brought to the court here, Elvish was taken for interrogation by a team from the Gurugram Police. He was questioned for three hours in connection with the assault case.
"After interrogation, we produced him in the court seeking his 14 days' judicial custody. But the court granted him bail. We will issue notices to other accused to join the investigation," said Sector 53 Police Station SHO Inspector Rajender Kumar.
Advocate Yadav said Elvish was granted bail on the grounds that he and the complainant YouTuber had reached a compromise.
On March 8, Elvish Yadav was caught in a video beating content creator Sagar Thakur in a mall shop in Gurugram.
On Thakur's complaint, an FIR was registered against Elvish Yadav and others at Sector 53 Police Station.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Where is question of offence when there is consensual relationship? SC asks
New Delhi (PTI): Where is the question of an offence when a relationship is consensual? the Supreme Court on Monday asked a woman who had challenged an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that had quashed an FIR against her former live-in partner in a case of alleged sexual assault on a false promise of marriage.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan noted that the woman lived together with the man and also had a child from him.
"Where is the question of offence when there is a consensual relationship? They were living together and she also had a child from him and then there is no marriage and now, she says sexual assault? For 15 years they lived together," Justice Nagarathna remarked.
The woman's counsel told the court that she had lost her husband earlier and was introduced to the accused by her brother-in-law.
The court was also told that the accused had promised to marry her and sexually exploited her.
Justice Nagarathna then asked, "Why did she go and live with him before marriage?"
"She lived with him. She had a child from him. He walks out because there is no marriage bond. Legal bond is not there. He walks out, that is the risk in a live-in relationship. So once he walks out, it does not become a criminal offence," she said.
The woman's lawyer submitted that the accused was already married and had concealed this fact.
"See, if there was marriage, the question of her rights would have been better. She could have filed regarding bigamy. She could have filed for maintenance. She would have got those reliefs. Now since there is no marriage, they live together, this is the risk. They can walk out any day. What do we do?" Justice Nagarathna said.
She suggested that the woman could pursue remedies, such as maintenance for the child, and asked the parties to go for mediation.
"Even if he goes to jail, what will she gain? We can think of some maintenance for the child. Child is now seven years (old). At least, some monetary compensation can be made for the child," Justice Nagarathna said.
The apex court issued a notice in the matter and asked the parties to explore if a settlement could be reached between the petitioner and the accused.
