AAP office in Delhi 'sealed', matter to be raised with EC: Atishi
New Delhi (PTI): The Aam Aadmi Party office in Delhi has been "sealed" from all sides, its senior leader Atishi claimed on Saturday and said the party will report the matter to the Election Commission.
In a post on X, she questioned the "sealing" of the party office, saying it goes against the concept of having a "level playing field" in elections as promised by the Constitution.
"How can access to a national party's office be stopped during the Lok Sabha election? This (is) against the 'level playing field' promised in the Indian Constitution. We are seeking time with the Election Commission (EC) to complain against this," the Delhi minister said in her post.
Another senior AAP leader and Delhi Minister Saurabh Bharadwaj alleged that all access to the party office has been stopped by the Union government.
"We will approach EC. The Central government has closed all access to AAP head office at ITO, that too in Model Code of Conduct," he said in a post on X.
In a press conference, Bharadwaj said that the Election Commission should act as a neutral institution and ensure strict action against police officers.
The AAP office at DDU Marg near ITO in central Delhi was also blocked on Friday during a protest by party leaders and volunteers at the BJP headquarters, just a few metres ahead of it, against the arrest of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal.
Bharadwaj said two ministers, including himself and Atishi, were stopped from going to the party office. How can a national party's office be sealed during elections, he asked.
He also claimed that the vehicle in which Atishi was going home was stopped by the police.
Atishi also posted a video on X in which she can be seen arguing with a Delhi Police officer while some AAP leaders laid down on the road as a mark of protest over being stopped by the police.
Bharadwaj accused the police of barricading the AAP office and preventing party leaders from going there and said they would complain to the EC over the matter. The AAP office was barricaded from all sides on Friday and no one was allowed to go inside, he claimed.
AAP national convener Kejriwal was remanded to Enforcement Directorate custody till March 28, following his arrest on Thursday by the agency in connection with a money-laundering case linked to the now-scrapped excise policy of the Delhi government.
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.
Where is question of offence when there is consensual relationship? SC asks
New Delhi (PTI): Where is the question of an offence when a relationship is consensual? the Supreme Court on Monday asked a woman who had challenged an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that had quashed an FIR against her former live-in partner in a case of alleged sexual assault on a false promise of marriage.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan noted that the woman lived together with the man and also had a child from him.
"Where is the question of offence when there is a consensual relationship? They were living together and she also had a child from him and then there is no marriage and now, she says sexual assault? For 15 years they lived together," Justice Nagarathna remarked.
The woman's counsel told the court that she had lost her husband earlier and was introduced to the accused by her brother-in-law.
The court was also told that the accused had promised to marry her and sexually exploited her.
Justice Nagarathna then asked, "Why did she go and live with him before marriage?"
"She lived with him. She had a child from him. He walks out because there is no marriage bond. Legal bond is not there. He walks out, that is the risk in a live-in relationship. So once he walks out, it does not become a criminal offence," she said.
The woman's lawyer submitted that the accused was already married and had concealed this fact.
"See, if there was marriage, the question of her rights would have been better. She could have filed regarding bigamy. She could have filed for maintenance. She would have got those reliefs. Now since there is no marriage, they live together, this is the risk. They can walk out any day. What do we do?" Justice Nagarathna said.
She suggested that the woman could pursue remedies, such as maintenance for the child, and asked the parties to go for mediation.
"Even if he goes to jail, what will she gain? We can think of some maintenance for the child. Child is now seven years (old). At least, some monetary compensation can be made for the child," Justice Nagarathna said.
The apex court issued a notice in the matter and asked the parties to explore if a settlement could be reached between the petitioner and the accused.
