'Some isolated incident...?' Delhi HC seeks Centre's response on alleged police brutality in Jantar Mantar protest
&imwidth=600&imheight=450&format=webp&quality=medium "'Some isolated incident...?' Delhi HC seeks Centre's response on alleged police brutality in Jantar Mantar protest")
Protesters at midnight in New Delhi's Jantar Mantar
The Delhi High Court said the Jantar Mantar incident was not an “isolated” occurrence and issued notice on a plea seeking an SIT probe. The court questioned the manner in which the incident was handled, observing, “There is a law how to handle protesters."
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (Jul 23) heard a pleas seeking a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe in alleged police excesses on Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protesters at Jantar Mantar and asked the Centre and State government to response on the matter. Asking for an explanation, the Delhi HC said that there is law to deal with protestors. The court observed that the incident could not have been “isolated.” The court was heard by a bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and justice Tejas Karia, who also directed police to preserve the CCTV footage, videography and other digital records related to the incident. This comes after Chief Justice of India (CJI) dismissed a petition saying “Don't waste our time.”
What Delhi HC said?
However, the court said that the matter will be heard on September 11. The bench said, “Is it a case of some isolated individual incident? Perhaps no. This is one. Number two, if it was an unlawful assembly as you say, it’s subject to further arguments and subject to further submissions. There is a law how to deal with it. If these issues are being raised in the PIL, how can you say that every individual should go and lodge an FIR,” the court told additional solicitor general SV Raju. The court said, “Issue notice. In the meantime, we direct that the relevant record, including the CCTV footage, videography, if any shall be preserved.”
What more the petitioner wanted and what Police said?
Representing the police, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and additional solicitor general SV Raju termed the pleas “publicity seeking petitions” which were filed by individuals for “hogging limelight.” Raju added that the agitation did not remain peaceful and there were videos showing injuries to police men and damage to police vehicles. Senior advocates N Hariharan, Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Vikas Singh who appeared for the petitioners, pressed that the protest was peaceful, and sought production orders authorising the use of force, identification of officers responsible and registration of FIRs against errant personnel.
How various Courts reacted on the matter?
Chief Justice Surya Kant dismissed a plea in Supreme Court on Jul 22 that urged the top court to take suo motu cognisance of the violation of fundamental rights and police brutality. The CJI said that the lawyer raising the issue should not “waste the time” of the justices and the court. "Don't waste our time and yours," the CJI adding, "We don't want to watch any videos." The petitioner had also called for the constitution of an independent judicial inquiry by a sitting bench of top court, and sought directions for registration of appropriate FIRs against the erring officials of the Delhi Police, and other concerned authorities. The plea also alleges that protesters were harassed and prevented from continuing their demonstration. The petitioner argues that the incident raises serious constitutional questions regarding the limits of police powers in dispersing peaceful assemblies
Trending Stories
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
The Delhi High Court on Jul 21 refused to urgently list a petition concerning the "excessive use of force" against students by the Delhi Police and Rapid Action Force personnel and said: “Don't drag the court into all this.”
However, the Uttarakhand High Court termed the government’s action as ‘gundagardi’ (hooliganism) and criticised the State over the detention of Uttarakhand Parivartan Party chief Prabhat Dhyani, while he was travelling to Delhi to participate in the protest called by CJP.
