New Delhi: The Supreme Court today dismissed a plea seeking an SIT probe into the February 2016 violence inside a trial court here during which former JNUSU president Kanhaiya Kumar and others were assaulted, saying it would not "flog a dead horse back to life".

 

A bench comprising Justices Ranjan Gogoi and R Banumathi did not accept the contentions advocating contempt action against the police officials and others for the incident which was described as "ghastly action" by the petitioner.

 

"What ghastly action," the bench asked advocate Prashant Bhushan, who appeared for petitioner and advocate Kamini Jaiswal.

 

Bhushan referred to the February 15 and 17, 2016 incidents of attacks on Kanhaiya, scribes, students, JNU teachers and defence lawyers inside the Patiala House district court premises here.

 

"We do not think of proceeding further. There is no need for an SIT (special investigation team)," the bench said.

 

To this, the lawyer said if no action is taken, then it might encourage people to do such acts.

 

"We will not proceed. We do not think we will flog a dead horse back to life. If you have grievances, you can take appropriate steps. You can lodge an FIR," the bench said.

 

"We find no reason to continue to entertain the present writ petition any further. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed," the top court said.

 

"Needless to say that the present order does not prevent the petitioner from taking appropriate action in accordance with law, if so advised. We have expressed no opinion on merit," it said in the order.

 

Senior advocate Ajit Kumar Sinha, appearing for Delhi Police, did not have to labour hard to oppose the plea.

 

The petitioner had sought initiation of contempt action against police officials and others for their alleged failure in protecting Kanhaiya from being assaulted inside the court.

 

The apex court had earlier questioned the police over the presence of some unsolicited persons in black robes in the courtroom where the then JNUSU leader was purportedly assaulted before being produced in connection with an alleged sedition case.

Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.



New Delhi: Yoga guru Baba Ramdev has sharply criticised the United States and Israel over their conflict with Iran, in a video from a television interview that has gone viral on social media.

Speaking on a show aired by ABP News, Ramdev was asked whether India should support Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who was reported to have been killed on the first day of the war on February 28.

Responding to the question, Ramdev said, “You can kill a person, but you cannot kill his ideas, his philosophy, his mindset, his spirit, or his valour and heroism.”

He went on to express support for Iran, saying he may not know much about the country but believes its people cannot be subdued. Referring to the Shia Muslim community, he said no one could make them “bow down” or defeat them, adding that a significant section of Iran’s population strongly identifies with Khamenei’s ideology.

When asked about Netanyahu, Ramdev criticised both him and US President Donald Trump, saying they are “both cut from the same cloth.” He added, “I am not calling anyone a thief; I am simply citing a proverb it implies that they are both of the same ilk, and I consider them both to be war criminals. I consider them criminals against humanity; I consider them criminals against nature and the environment.”

He further said that the United States and Israel have “erected a Himalaya-sized mountain of political mistrust” and claimed that both countries would have to face the consequences for decades. “In this conflict, neither can America and Israel emerge victorious, nor can Iran be defeated,” he said.

Ramdev’s remarks come at a time when India’s position on the conflict has drawn attention. The government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has maintained what it describes as “strategic autonomy” in foreign policy.