Express News Service
RANCHI: Disappointed with the ongoing probe into the violence during a protest in Ranchi on June 10 against Nupur Sharma’s comments on the Prophet, the Jharkhand High Court has asked the state government why the matter should not be handed over to NIA.
A bench of Chief Justice Ravi Ranjan and Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad observed the state government did not appear serious as it had done nothing to expedite the probe, except to change the SSP.
The violence had forced police to resort to firing and lathi-charge, which resulted into the death of two persons while over a dozen were hurt.
Petitioner Pankaj Yadav has demanded an NIA investigation into the incident.
According to his advocate Rajeev Kumar, the bench said it had been told the NIA had already conducted a preliminary inquiry into the matter and asked the agency to submit a sealed report on it.
The court asked the state DGP to file an affidavit explaining why the SSP was removed despite the fact that he was there on the spot, Kumar said.
The bench questioned why such a serious incident was being probed by a DSP-rank officer and was also peeved over the government not giving clear a reply to the 10 points raised by it.
RANCHI: Disappointed with the ongoing probe into the violence during a protest in Ranchi on June 10 against Nupur Sharma’s comments on the Prophet, the Jharkhand High Court has asked the state government why the matter should not be handed over to NIA.
A bench of Chief Justice Ravi Ranjan and Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad observed the state government did not appear serious as it had done nothing to expedite the probe, except to change the SSP.
The violence had forced police to resort to firing and lathi-charge, which resulted into the death of two persons while over a dozen were hurt.
Petitioner Pankaj Yadav has demanded an NIA investigation into the incident.
According to his advocate Rajeev Kumar, the bench said it had been told the NIA had already conducted a preliminary inquiry into the matter and asked the agency to submit a sealed report on it.
The court asked the state DGP to file an affidavit explaining why the SSP was removed despite the fact that he was there on the spot, Kumar said.
The bench questioned why such a serious incident was being probed by a DSP-rank officer and was also peeved over the government not giving clear a reply to the 10 points raised by it.
