Delhi riots: Court seeks report on Umar Khalid being produced in handcuffs
New Delhi(PTI): A Delhi court on Thursday sought a response from the Prisons DG on a plea seeking a department enquiry into former JNU student leader Umar Khalid, arrested in a case related to larger conspiracy during Delhi riots, being produced in handcuffs.
According to law, an accused cannot be put in handcuffs without specific order in this regard.
Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat also issued directions to send a copy of the order to the commissioner of police who may file a report after an inquiry by a responsible senior officer on whether Khalid was brought in handcuffs on Thursday and, if so, on what orders.
The court passed the order on an application moved by Khalid's counsel, seeking departmental enquiry "into the arbitrary and illegal production of the applicant in handcuffs/fetters on February 17".
The counsel alleged that Khalid was produced in court by police officials of Lock-Up, Karkardooma Courts, in handcuffs despite there being no order from the court and in fact, "there are two contrary orders passed by two different courts".
He submitted that this was a violation of the rights of the accused and inquiry must be conducted to find fault with the delinquent police officials.
An undertrial remains in the custody of the court throughout the proceedings and the extreme step of handcuffing the accused can only be taken after a court allows it on a request or an application containing reasons, the court noted.
"This court has passed no such orders for this accused or, for that matter, any accused in this case," the judge said.
The court further noted that even the investigating agency, Special Cell, never made such a request in the case.
"Let notice be also issued to DG (Prisons) to apprise this court whether any such orders have been passed from their end. Let a report be also filed by the reader and PA of this court in this regard," the judge said.
Khalid, along with several others, was booked for being the "masterminds" of the February 2020 riots, which had left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
The violence had erupted during the protests against the CAA and the National Register of Citizens.
Besides him, JNU students Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita, Jamia Coordination Committee members Safoora Zargar, former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain and several others were also been booked in the 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.
Congress using hijab issue to pacify minority anger, alleges Karnataka LoP R Ashoka
Bengaluru: Leader of Opposition in the Assembly R. Ashoka has accused the Congress government of using the hijab issue to placate what he described as discontent among minority voters after the Davanagere by-election.
In a post on X on Wednesday, Ashoka alleged that the state government, instead of addressing issues such as price rise, corruption, farmers’ distress and law and order, was attempting to retain its minority vote base by reviving the hijab issue.
Referring to the 2022 dress code introduced by the BJP government, which prohibited hijab in schools and colleges, Ashoka said the Karnataka High Court had upheld the policy and emphasised the importance of discipline in educational institutions.
He questioned the Congress government’s move to revisit the issue and asked whether setting aside the court-backed policy to benefit one community could be described as secularism.
Ashoka further alleged that while the government was willing to permit hijab, it continued to prohibit saffron shawls.
He accused the government of dividing students on religious lines rather than treating schools and colleges as spaces of equality.
Drawing a comparison with Mamata Banerjee’s government in West Bengal, Ashoka claimed that excessive appeasement politics had harmed the state and warned that the Congress in Karnataka could face a similar political response.
He said voters in Karnataka would teach the Congress a lesson for what he termed “vote-bank politics” and for compromising constitutional and judicial principles.
