MP man reportedly connected to BJP seen urinating on Tribal man in viral video; Booked
Sidhi (MP), Jul 4: Police in Madhya Pradesh's Sidhi district on Tuesday registered a case after a video showing a man urinating on a tribal youth went viral.
Opposition Congress claimed that the accused was linked to the Bharatiya Janata Party. The ruling party, however, denied the allegation.
"A viral video from Sidhi district has come to my notice....I have instructed the administration to arrest the culprit and take the strictest action and also invoke the National Security Act," Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan said in a tweet.
An official from the Chief Minister's Office said a case was registered against the accused, identified as Pravesh Shukla, at Bahari police station under Indian Penal Code sections 294 (obscene acts), 504 (intentional insult to provoke breach of peace), and provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Action against the stringent NSA was also initiated, he added.
State Congress chief Kamal Nath in a statement said, "A video of atrocity of (a man) urinating on a tribal youth from Sidhi district of the state has surfaced. There is no place for such a heinous act with the youth of tribal community in civilised society."
The former chief minister also said that the culprit was said to be associated with the BJP.
Madhya Pradesh already ranks first when it comes to atrocities against tribals, he said.
"This incident has put entire Madhya Pradesh to shame....strictest punishment should be given to the guilty person and atrocities on tribals in Madhya Pradesh should be stopped," Nath added.
State BJP media in-charge Ashish Agarwal said the accused was not associated with the party.
"The BJP will always oppose every heinous act against the tribal community. MP BJP demands the strictest action against this person," Agarwal said.
Both the BJP and Congress have been trying to woo the tribal community in the state ahead of the year-end Assembly elections.
Some social media posts claimed that the accused Pravesh Shukla was a representative of BJP MLA from Sidhi Kedarnath Shukla. The MLA could not be contacted for his comment despite several attempts.
Pawan Khera, chairman of the Congress's Media and Publicity Department, shared the video clip along with a picture of a banner on which the accused was described as `Vidhayak Pratinidhi Sidhi'.
"In the 21st century, such inhuman atrocities are happening with the tribals of our country and we are dreaming of becoming Vishwaguru! What could be more embarrassing for all of us than this?" he tweeted.
प्रदेश के सीधी जिले से एक आदिवासी युवक के ऊपर पेशाब करने की क्रूरता का वीडियो सामने आया है। आदिवासी समाज के युवक के साथ ऐसी जघन्य और गिरी हुई हरकत का सभ्य समाज में कोई स्थान नहीं है।
— Kamal Nath (@OfficeOfKNath) July 4, 2023
आरोप है कि पेशाब करने वाला व्यक्ति भारतीय जनता पार्टी से जुड़ा हुआ बताया जा रहा है।
मध्य प्रदेश…
इक्कीसवीं शताब्दी में हमारे देश के आदिवासियों के साथ इस तरह का अमानवीय अत्याचार हो रहा हो और हम देख रहे हैं विश्वगुरु बनने का सपना!
— Pawan Khera 🇮🇳 (@Pawankhera) July 4, 2023
इस से ज़्यादा शर्मनाक हम सबके लिए और क्या हो सकता है? pic.twitter.com/Ctjqmsib8c
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.
Court can reject anticipatory bail but cannot direct accused to surrender: SC
New Delhi (PTI): A court can reject anticipatory bail of an accused but it has no jurisdiction to direct him to surrender before the trial court, the Supreme Court has said.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a man accused of cheating and forgery.
"If the court wants to reject the anticipatory bail, it may do so, but the court has no jurisdiction to say that the petitioner should now surrender," the bench said.
The Jharkhand High Court had rejected anticipatory bail plea of the accused and asked him to surrender and seek regular bail.
In this case, a complaint had been filed before a magistrate alleging offences under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using forged document) and 120B read with 34 of the IPC, in connection with a land dispute.
The high court had dismissed the second anticipatory bail application of the accused on the ground that no new circumstances were shown.
It had relied on its earlier order rejecting his first anticipatory bail plea, in which the court directed the petitioner to surrender before the trial court and seek regular bail in terms of the decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
The top court said such a direction was wholly without jurisdiction and said that if a court chooses to reject anticipatory bail, it may do so, but it cannot compel the accused to surrender.
