Court seeks action taken report from SHO on NRI woman’s plea against BJP ex-MLA's son and wife
The Court has specifically sought details on whether any cognisable offence was made out during inquiry or investigation, whether any FIR was registered, and the present status of the matter
Delhi's Patiala House courts have directed the Station House Officer (SHO) of Tughlaq Road Police Station to file a detailed action taken report on a complaint lodged by a 37-year-old NRI woman.
She has alleged prolonged police inaction despite serious accusations of physical violence, sexual abuse and criminal intimidation against former BJP MLA Vijay Jolly's son.
Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Aridaman Singh Cheema, on February 9, after hearing submissions made by the complainant’s counsel that no action had been taken despite approaching the SHO and the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), directed the SHO to clarify whether any complaint was received from the woman and, if so, what steps were taken.
The Court has specifically sought details on whether any cognisable offence was made out during inquiry or investigation, whether any FIR was registered, and the present status of the matter. In the event no cognisable offence was found, the SHO has been asked to inform whether the complainant was duly intimated of the same. A copy of the complaint along with annexures has been directed to be supplied to the Naib Court of PS Tughlaq Road.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on April 13.
Meanwhile, former BJP MLA from Delhi, Vijay Jolly, told The Tribune that the relationship between the complainant and his son was consensual. “Both are adults. My son was enticed. When the marriage proposal did not work out, she became agitated and filed a complaint with the police making false allegations,” he said.
Jolly further said that they would contest the case and would consider filing a defamation suit once the action taken report is submitted before the court.
The woman has approached the Magistrate seeking registration of an FIR and a court-monitored investigation, saying that more than a month has passed since she first reported the alleged offences but no formal case has been registered.
According to the complaint, a resident of London, on January 8, 2026, her lawyer visited Tughlaq Road Police Station at around 4.20 pm to report repeated incidents of alleged physical assault, sexual abuse and threats. It is alleged that despite remaining at the police station until well past midnight and submitting digital evidence, no FIR was registered.
The complainant has further alleged that during the interaction, police officials enquired whether the father of one of the accused was a politician. Upon confirmation, there was, according to her, a noticeable change in the conduct of the officers present.
"The accused named in the complaint are Rishi Jolly and Rashmi Jolly, said to be the son and wife of former MLA Vijay Jolly, who is associated with the ruling political party," as per complaint.
The woman claims she was neither given a diary number nor any formal acknowledgment of her complaint, except for a stamped receipt. The Investigating Officer allegedly left the police station without completing any formal process.
Despite verbal assurances that an FIR would be registered the following day, no action followed. Subsequent attempts by the complainant and her counsel to contact the Investigating Officer allegedly went unanswered.
Between the intervening night of January 8 and the morning of January 9, the woman escalated the matter by emailing her complaint and digital evidence to senior police officials, including the DCP and the Commissioner of Police. On January 10, she submitted a detailed written representation to the DCP highlighting the alleged inaction at the police station.
However, according to the plea, even after these representations, no FIR was registered. When her lawyer visited the police station again, he was allegedly told that “discussions were going on”, without any formal update.
In her petition before the magistrate, the woman has alleged that the continued inaction is influenced by the “strong political connections” of the accused persons and that “extraneous considerations have prevailed over legal duty”. She has said that instead of being treated as a victim of grave offences, she was met with “indifference and suspicion”.
