The Delhi High Court has finally completed its hearing on Jamia Milia Islamia University Anti-CAA incident from the petitioners’ side today. The hearing started yesterday with Senior Advocate Mr. Colin Gonsalves’s arguments.
Mr. Gonsalves mentioned the Police brutality over the Jamia Students and demanded an independent Special Investigation Team be established with regards to this case.
While arguing Mr. Gonsalves read out several testimonies of the Jamia Millia Islamia Students and submitted that “There are 100 testimonies and not a single controverted by the Delhi Police.”
“Police Criminality will be proofed 100% if Jamia CCTV Footage is taken into evidence,” Mr. Gonsalves added by saying that police made such remarks which cannot be read in an open court, he further read out a testimony stating “A Student showing another badly injured student to the police said, “Isko to bhejdo mar jayega”, police officer replied “Koi farak nahi padta agar 1 or 2 mar bhi gaye”
Mr. Gonsalves submitted before the court that, “It was not a riot, it was a police assault and was communal, Why would police aim at the head of the 16 to 18-year-old student?” He further raised a question before the court, “- How can we trust you with the investigation?”
Whereas, Senior Advocate Mr. Salman Khurshid submitted that, In the present circumstances, the entry was without permission. Added complications would not have arisen if the police would have taken permission from the Proctor or VC
Mr. Khurshid stated that “There is a need for proportionality for use of force in the university, to be examined.”
Mr. Khurshid further added that the police is a judge in their own case, The core issue is that there has to be a fact-finding inquiry.
The issue of Police entering the Jamia Millia Islamia was raised by Mr. Khurshid as the Police are not supposed to enter inside a University without informing the University Authorities.
Whereas, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising submitted before the court that there was the use of excessive force by the police over the students of Jamia, and “Despite the provocations, police were only supposed to use minimum possible force. This principle was violated when they barged into the campus”
Jaising also asked that “where is the demand from the police to enter the University campus? They had loudspeakers, phones, walkie-talkie, but they didn’t make a demand for entering the campus.
When no student was arrested, what was the purpose of entering the campus? The intention was sheer vindictiveness, teaching a lesson to the students with a danda”
Today the Court heard Advocate Mr. Siddharth Seem and Advocate Sneha Mukharjee appearing for the petitioners who allegedly suffered serious injuries.
Adv. Siddharth Seem appearing for the petitioner, who is an LLM student and suffered injury in his eye and is now permanently blind, read out the testimony and submitted that Delhi Police refused to assist the person who was bleeding from his eyes, this shows the apathy of Delhi Police.
Mr. Seem further contended that “He was not the part of the protest, he was studying.” Mr. Seem further added that the questions asked by the Delhi Police to the Doctors were leading.
Advocate Sneha Mukharjee appearing for the other petitioner whose legs were fractured submitted that the petitioner fractured both his legs, however, he didn’t participate and was in the library. Ms. Mukharjee further added that the questions asked by the Delhi Police to the Doctors are distracting experts from what happened. Action must be taken against Delhi Police, she added.
Another advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that they are not pressing anything except a fact-finding inquiry and the arguments made by Sr. Adv Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv. Salman Khurshid and Sr. Adv. Indira Jaising widely covers our contentions
However, ASG Mr. Aman Lekhi sought time as he was busy in some other matters. Whereas, CJ asked him to start at least.
Mr. Lekhi submitted that the petitions are not maintainable and entitlement to compensation will not come at this stage. He further added that in the universities access to the police is never denied, whether it is international universities or Indian.
On all counts, the petitions are the same and should be dismissed, Mr. Lekhi added.
Read Also: Delhi riots: Delhi HC allows trial court’s 60-day extension for police probe
The court ordered that it has heard the arguments of the petitioners and started hearing the respondents whereas, Mr. Aman Lekhi sought time for arguments as he is busy with other matters
The matter is listed for 14th August 2020.
-India Legal Bureau