Court summons Kejriwal in defamation case

March 17, 2015

New Delhi, Mar 17: Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and two other AAP leaders including Deputy CM Manish Sisodia were today directed by a court here to appear before it later in the day in connection with a criminal defamation complaint, saying there was no ground for exemption from their appearance.

Metropolitan Magistrate Mayuri Singh took strong view of absence of Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yogendra Yadav, and said they "have no respect for the law".

Kejriwal summonsThe three AAP leaders have, however, sought exemption from personal appearance for the day on the ground that the lawyers are on strike and the case was at a crucial stage and the presence of advocates was necessary.

The case was put up before magistrate Singh as Metropolitan Magistrate Muneesh Garg, before whom the matter was going on, was on leave today.

The court had earlier directed Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yadav to positively appear before it today as it was scheduled to pass order in the issue of framing of charges.

During the hearing, the court said the exemption application displayed no reason for the absence of the accused.

"There is nothing to reflect why accused (Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yadav) have not appeared. Accused have no respect for law. Considering no one has appeared for accused, I am keeping the matter pending at 2 PM. Call at 2 PM," the magistrate said.

The court noted that a clerk appeared on behalf of the accused and his advocates and moved the exemption plea.

The complainant, advocate Surender Kumar Sharma, opposed the plea saying the lawyers are on strike and not the litigants and it would not be in the interest of justice if any adjournment is given in the case as the case had earlier been adjourned three times due to absence of the accused.

Sharma had alleged that in 2013 he was approached by volunteers of AAP who had asked him to contest the Delhi Assembly elections on a party ticket, saying Kejriwal was pleased with his social services.

He filled up the application form to contest the polls after being told by Sisodia and Yadav that AAP's Political Affairs Committee of the party had decided to give him the ticket. However, it was later denied to him.

On October 14, 2013, the complainant claimed, articles in leading newspapers carried "defamatory, unlawful and derogatory words used by the accused persons" which have lowered his reputation in the Bar and the society.

The court, which had earlier reserved its order for February 11, had granted exemption to the three AAP leaders from personal appearance for that day and had given them a last opportunity to positively appear before it today.

Kejriwal had sought exemption from personal appearance for that day on the ground that he had to meet Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh after the Delhi Assembly elections results which were announced on February 10.

The summons were issued on the complaint under sections 499, 500 (defamation) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC, with the court saying there was prima facie material to summon the accused.

While issuing summons against AAP leaders, the court had said, "The press release published in newspapers as well as testimonies of witnesses reflect that defamatory remarks were published in the newspaper which affected the reputation of the complainant in the society and lowered his reputation in the eyes of other members of the society."

The court had granted bail to Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yadav, after they had appeared before it on June 4 last year in pursuance to summons against them.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 22,2020

New Delhi, Jun 22: The Delhi Police Monday urged the Delhi High Court to grant them a day’s more time for seeking instructions on a plea by Jamia student Safoora Zargar, who was pregnant and arrested under the anti-terror law --UAPA--, seeking bail in a case related to communal violence in northeast Delhi during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act in February.

Justice Rajiv Shakdher, who conducted the hearing through video conferencing, allowed the request after Zargar’s counsel said she has no objection to it and listed the matter for Tuesday.

Zargar, M Phil student of Jamia Millia Islamia University, is more than four months pregnant.

During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Delhi Police, sought a day’s time to take instructions on the issue and said it will be in “larger interest” if he is given indulgence.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aman Lekhi also joined Mehta and said they are ready with the arguments on merits of the case but they do not intend to proceed on merits at this stage.

Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, appearing for Zargar, said the woman is in a delicate state and is in a fairly advanced stage pregnancy and if the police need time to respond to the plea, she be granted interim bail for the time being.

The high court asked Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta to come back with instructions on Tuesday.

The police has also filed a status report in response to the bail plea.

Jamia Coordination Committee member Zargar, who was arrested by the Special Cell of Delhi Police on April 10, has challenged in the high court the June 4 order of the trial court denying her bail in the case.

The hearing in the high court also witnessed exchange of words between Mehta, Lekhi on one side and Delhi government standing counsel (criminal) Rahul Mehra who objected the appearance of the two senior law officers on behalf of Delhi Police in the case.

Mehra contended that unlike another North East Delhi violence matter in which requisite approval was sought by the Delhi Police to be represented by a team of lawyers led by the Solicitor General, no such procedure was followed in this case.

"They know that my view in such cases will be more humanitarian and not as per their whims and fancies. I am not supposed to be the mouth piece of the Delhi Police, I am an officer of the court," he said.

Lekhi shot back "a client chooses the lawyer and a lawyer cannot impose himself on the client.

He said this controversy would deviate the court from the issue in hand and Mehra's objection can be kept aside in this case.

The high court concluded the hearing, asking the counsel for Delhi Police to sort out their battles by tomorrow.

 The trial court, in its order, had said “when you choose to play with embers, you cannot blame the wind to have carried the spark a bit too far and spread the fire.”

It had said that during the course of investigation a larger conspiracy was discernible and if there was prima facie evidence of conspiracy, acts and statements made by any one of the conspirators, it is admissible against all.

The trial court had said that even if there was no direct act of violence attributable to the accused (Zargar), she cannot shy away from her liability under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

However, the trial court had asked the concerned jail superintendent to provide adequate medical aid and the assistance to Zargar.

The police had earlier claimed that Zargar allegedly blocked a road near Jaffrabad metro station during the anti-CAA protests and instigated people that led to the riots in the area.

It further claimed that she was allegedly part of the “premediated conspiracy” to incite communal riots in northeast Delhi in February.

Communal clashes had broken out in northeast Delhi on February 24 after violence between citizenship law supporters and protesters spiralled out of control leaving at least 53 people dead and scores injured.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com web desk
June 9,2020

Bijnor: A 17-year-old Dalit youth was shot dead by four miscreants belonging to the upper caste of Hinduism after the former tried to enter a temple in Uttar Pradesh.

The deceased was identified as Vikas Jatav. The accused had tried to stop the deceased from entering into a temple. 

On being stopped from entering the temple located in Domkhera village, Jatav raised and objection and started arguing with the accused. 

The accused were identified as - Lala Chauhan, Horam Chauhan, Bhushan and Jasveer. The incident took place on May 31, according to the father of the deceased. 

How it happened 
On May 31, Jatav went to a temple in Domkhera to offer his prayers. The four accused, however, did not let him go inside. Following this, an argument broke out between the accused and the 17-year-old boy. 

On the same day, the victim approached the police and lodged a complaint in relation to the incident. The police, however, did not take any action against the accused men. 

Late night on Saturday, Jatav was sleeping inside his house when the four men barged in and opened fire at him. 

Hearing the gunshots, Jatav's family rushed to rescue him, following which, the accused escaped. Vikas was profusely bleeding after being shot and succumbed to the injuries before he could reach the hospital. 

Lala Chauhan and Horam were nabbed by the police while the other two are still at large. The four accused have been booked under section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the SC/ST Act.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 2,2020

Lucknow, Jun 2: Bahujan Samaj Party chief Mayawati on Tuesday said protests in the US after the death of George Floyd, an African-American man, is a clear message to the world that a common man's life has value.

She said this is also guaranteed by the India Constitution, but the governments don't follow it, resulting in the current plight of migrants workers.

Floyd, a 46-year-old restaurant worker from Houston, died in Minneapolis on Monday after a white police officer pinned him to the ground. Video footage showed the officer kneeling on Floyd's neck as he gasped for breath, sparking widespread protests across the US.

"Floyd's killing by police and the 'Black lives matter' agitation in the US have given a clear message to the world that a common man's life has value and it should not be taken for granted," Mayawati said in a tweet in Hindi.

"India's constitution guarantees independence, security, self-respect and pride and governments should give special attention to it. If it was followed, crores of migrants labourers would not have to witness such bad days," she added.

She also demanded better coordination between states to check the spread of coronavirus and said Centre should intervene.

"While coronavirus patients are rising, there is lack of coordination between states and with the Centre, and allegation and counter-allegations are going on and sealing of state borders is unjustified and it is weakening the fight against the virus.  The Centre should intervene," she said in a separate tweet.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.