‘That is the job of Centre’: Delhi HC dismisses plea seeking NIA probe into CJP NEET protest
&imwidth=600&imheight=450&format=webp&quality=medium "‘That is the job of Centre’: Delhi HC dismisses plea seeking NIA probe into CJP NEET protest")
People sit at the protest site at Jantar Mantar supporting the Cockroach Janata Party's (CJP) protest. Photograph: (ANI)
Delhi HC dismissed a PIL seeking an NIA probe into the July 20 NEET protest, ruling only the Centre can decide under the NIA Act. The plea alleged a wider conspiracy involving political and foreign-linked elements.
Delhi High Court on Friday (Jul 24) rejected a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking an investigation by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) into the July 20 protest over NEET paper leak. This came after a petition was filed alleging that the protest was not an isolated event but part of a broader conspiracy involving foreign-funded organisations and political elements.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that the NIA can only be involved after satisfaction of the Central government, which the court cannot substitute.
What did the court say?
“See your prayers. It is in respect of issuing direction to NIA to conduct inquiry and investigation etc. That is for authorities to consider if a crime reported has to be probed by State Govt or State Police. So far as your prayer for NIA is concerned, it is for the Centre to take a call. It can be suo motu or initiated on report submitted by the SHO. We cannot substitute our satisfaction for satisfaction which is to be recorded by the Central Government,” CJ told the petitioner.
Questioning the petitioner, the court said, “Tell us what the statutory mechanism for invoking NIA jurisdiction is... NIA is not an inquiry agency. It is an investigation agency. At this juncture, if there is an FIR, then recourse to Section 6 (Investigation of Scheduled Offences) can be had...In terms of Section 6, there has to be an FIR. Thereafter, the whole procedure is prescribed. How can you ask us to first get an inquiry conducted and then ask them to conduct an investigation by NIA?”
Section 6(3) provides that, considering the gravity of the offence and other relevant factors, the Central Government must decide within 15 days whether the case qualifies as a Scheduled Offence and should be investigated by the NIA.
Trending Stories
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
)
)
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
Also read | ‘Reckless reporting’: CJI Surya Kant denies rejecting plea on Delhi Police brutality amid protests
The CJI further said, “There has to be report and FIR. Thereafter, the officer in charge will forward information to the State, which will go to the Central Govt. And if the Centre finds it as fit case, then it can refer the matter to the NIA. You are asking us to form an opinion that this is fit case for NIA investigation. That is the job of the central government.”
What did the petition claim?
The petition was filed by Satish Kumar Aggarwal, a former vice-president of the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha. In the plea, Aggarwal argues that what initially began as a protest focused on demands over the NEET paper leak issue has allegedly turned into a political demonstration after the involvement of various leaders. It added that the July 20 “Sansad Chalo” march witnessed incidents of violence, attacks on journalists, damage to public and private property, obstruction of public movement, injuries to police personnel and an attempt to breach Parliament security.
He further sought an investigation by a specialised national security agency, saying that these incidents require a detailed probe into the organisation, participants and possible external links.
Also read | CJP members to get arrested tonight? Dipke makes dramatic claim ahead of talks with Nadda
“The incident should not be treated as a simple case of public agitation or be confined to the registration of an ordinary FIR. In view of the circumstances surrounding the alleged attempt to enter the Parliament House premises and the possibility of involvement of organised or external elements, a comprehensive investigation by a specialised national security agency is necessary to ascertain the true facts, identify the persons responsible, and examine any larger conspiracy behind the incident,” the petitioner alleged.
The petition also raised allegations regarding the participation of social activist Sonam Wangchuk and author Arundhati Roy in the protest, claiming their associations and public positions required scrutiny. It further named several political leaders, including Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh and Atishi, among others, alleging their involvement influenced the course of the demonstration.
