Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday came down heavily on the Gujarat Police officers who took a man into custody, ignoring the interim anticipatory bail granted to him by the apex court on December 8 in the case.
The Supreme Court expressed its displeasure and dissatisfaction with the police conduct and the magistrate’s alleged failure to comply with the apex court’s earlier order. A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, led by Justice BR Gavai and also including Justice Sandeep Mehta, issued contempt notices to the additional chief secretary of the home department of Gujarat government for the alleged violation of its earlier order.
The petitioner’s lawyer informed the apex court that despite the interim anticipatory bail order issued by the Supreme Court on December 8, the petitioner received a notice on December 12, directing him to appear before the magistrate in response to the police’s custody application.
The petitioner claimed that the magistrate remanded him to police custody for four days until December 16, and during his time in police custody, he was threatened and beaten, as per the petitioner’s lawyer. The lawyer also asserted that the magistrate did not comply with the Supreme Court’s earlier order from December 8.
Expressing its displeasure over the alleged violation of its earlier order, the apex court stated that this constituted a gross contempt of the court’s order on the face of the record. “How could he have been taken into custody? How could the investigating officer dare to seek the remand?” Justice Mehta asked.The top court further remarked that this situation needed to be rectified in some manner.
“Let the magistrate learn a lesson from this. We will also issue a contempt notice to the magistrate. Is this how they deal with the Supreme Court’s orders?” Justice Gavai questioned. The court did not accept the unconditional apology offered by the Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who acknowledged that the officers had made a “blunder.” However, the two-judge bench remained unyielding, stating that whatever had occurred was a “gross” violation.
Also in top court
Hearing on Umar Khalid’s bail plea adjourned The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned to January 24 the hearing on the bail plea filed by former JNU student Umar Khalid, in a case related to his alleged involvement in the February 2020 communal violence in the national capital. The social activist, has been in jail since his arrest by the Delhi Police on September 14, 2020 and was booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. A two-judge bench on Wednesday adjourned the matter, after it was apprised by senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, who appeared for Khalid, that he couldn’t argue the case as he was busy with hearing of a case by the Constitution Bench. Follow channel on WhatsApp
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday came down heavily on the Gujarat Police officers who took a man into custody, ignoring the interim anticipatory bail granted to him by the apex court on December 8 in the case.
The Supreme Court expressed its displeasure and dissatisfaction with the police conduct and the magistrate’s alleged failure to comply with the apex court’s earlier order. A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, led by Justice BR Gavai and also including Justice Sandeep Mehta, issued contempt notices to the additional chief secretary of the home department of Gujarat government for the alleged violation of its earlier order.
The petitioner’s lawyer informed the apex court that despite the interim anticipatory bail order issued by the Supreme Court on December 8, the petitioner received a notice on December 12, directing him to appear before the magistrate in response to the police’s custody application.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
The petitioner claimed that the magistrate remanded him to police custody for four days until December 16, and during his time in police custody, he was threatened and beaten, as per the petitioner’s lawyer. The lawyer also asserted that the magistrate did not comply with the Supreme Court’s earlier order from December 8.
Expressing its displeasure over the alleged violation of its earlier order, the apex court stated that this constituted a gross contempt of the court’s order on the face of the record. “How could he have been taken into custody? How could the investigating officer dare to seek the remand?” Justice Mehta asked.
The top court further remarked that this situation needed to be rectified in some manner.
“Let the magistrate learn a lesson from this. We will also issue a contempt notice to the magistrate. Is this how they deal with the Supreme Court’s orders?” Justice Gavai questioned. The court did not accept the unconditional apology offered by the Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who acknowledged that the officers had made a “blunder.” However, the two-judge bench remained unyielding, stating that whatever had occurred was a “gross” violation.
Also in top court
Hearing on Umar Khalid’s bail plea adjourned
The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned to January 24 the hearing on the bail plea filed by former JNU student Umar Khalid, in a case related to his alleged involvement in the February 2020 communal violence in the national capital. The social activist, has been in jail since his arrest by the Delhi Police on September 14, 2020 and was booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. A two-judge bench on Wednesday adjourned the matter, after it was apprised by senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, who appeared for Khalid, that he couldn’t argue the case as he was busy with hearing of a case by the Constitution Bench. Follow channel on WhatsApp
