Four Youth Congress workers who protested at Bharat Mandapam have been sent to 5 days police custody. Delhi court rejected his bail pleas. They were protesting against a trade agreement.
New Delhi: Delhi’s Patiala House Court on Saturday sent four Indian Youth Congress (IYC) workers—Krishna Hari, Kundan Yadav, Ajay Kumar and Narsingh—to five-day police custody. All of them were arrested in connection with the protest during the AI Summit held at Bharat Mandapam on Friday. He was wearing a T-shirt on which the slogan ‘India US Trade Deal Compromised’ was written.
The court has rejected the bail petitions of all the accused. The court said that the investigation is still in the very initial stage, there is a danger of the accused escaping and tampering with the evidence, hence it would be too early to grant bail. Delhi Police argued that the accused raised anti-national slogans and demonstrated on the lines of Nepal’s ‘Gen Z Protest’ to defame the country internationally. He performed this when international guests were present at the Bharat Mandapam.
Delhi Police has registered a case on charges like obstructing government work, attacking a government employee, hate speech and criminal conspiracy. Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Ravi, after hearing the arguments of Delhi Police and Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), sent the four accused to five-day custody. The police had sought custody of the four accused to expose the conspiracy and identify and arrest others involved.
Opposing the remand, lawyers Rupesh Singh Bhadauria, Litesh Batra and Chitwan Godara said the accused belonged to an opposition political party. They protested at Bharat Mandapam, which is their right. Their demonstration was peaceful. He also said that he is a party official. The lawyers said, “The protest was peaceful, there is no video which shows any aggression or violence. All the charges against the accused carry a punishment of only up to seven years. Hence, there is no need for arrest and custody.”
The lawyer of the accused said that this FIR is nothing but a political act. The lawyer also argued that they are educated people and have degrees.
Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Atul Srivastava said that the accused raised anti-national slogans. He was wearing a T-shirt with a message against the Prime Minister.
While seeking five-day custody, Delhi Police argued that anti-national slogans were raised in the presence of international leaders and guests.
Police said that their custody is necessary to arrest the other accused who fled from the spot and confront them with electronic evidence. Delhi Police further said that the custody of the accused was necessary for effective investigation of the case. Police said three policemen were injured when they tried to nab the accused, they have to recover their mobiles, and they also have to investigate whether they had received funding from any organization.
APP Srivastava said that these four accused came together from four different places, they got T-shirts printed, five days’ custody is necessary to investigate the case. Opposing the remand, the lawyer of the accused said that they are being targeted because they are from an opposition party, they have been beaten badly. There is a recession in the country and protests are happening everywhere, will everyone be arrested?
Advocate Rupesh Singh Bhadauria argued, “There should be a solid reason for sending them to custody. It should not be given mechanically like a machine. They are young, they have careers, political dissent should not be crushed like this,” the lawyer said. It was a peaceful protest.” On the other hand, APP said that if they are educated people then they should be aware of the consequences of their actions.
The court asked the investigating officer why five days’ custody was necessary? The investigating officer said that there is a deep conspiracy to defame, other protesters fled from the spot, hence custody is necessary for proper investigation. They are from different states and need to be taken to their destinations. Arguing the bail pleas, the counsel for the accused said there was no evidence to show that the protest was not peaceful. All offenses carry a punishment of not more than seven years. There is no need to arrest them and send them to custody.
The lawyer argued that the guidelines in the Earnesh Kumar case were not followed. APP Srivastava opposed the bail pleas and said that the allegations are serious, a conspiracy to defame the country internationally. They are not eligible to be released on bail. (ANI)