 on Tuesday (December 19) went on a flash strike, protesting the forcible break-in and arrest by the Delhi Police){kind=link}
Above: Delhi High Court. Photo: Anil Shakya
The Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) on Tuesday (December 19) went on a flash strike, protesting the forcible break-in and arrest by the Delhi Police (Safdarjung Enclave Police Station) of a 60-year-old lady lawyer on charges of “stalking”.
The DHCBA resolution (see below) states it has called an emergent meeting at 11.30 am on Tuesday and that its executive committee had “discussed the shocking and unfortunate incident” of December 18, “while the police official… trespassed into the house of Mr R K Saini, advocate, when he was in the High Court and… forcibly detained a lady advocate, aged about 60 years and forved her in the police Gypsy. It has also been noted that the Delhi High Court had passed an order at about 3.45pm on the assurance of the…” additional public prosecutor “Mukesh Kumar that no coercive action shall be taken against the lady advocate.”
A case – Delhi Commission For Women (DCW) Chairperson Ms Swati Maliwal Vs CP Delhi – is already in court, before the bench of Justice Pratibha Rani. The case is about the quashing of an FIR against the DCW Chairperson.
That case did not have any hearing on Tuesday, with the matter adjourned to January 11, 2018, but a bench of Justices Siddarth Mridul and Deepa Sharma heard the instances of the day over which the DHCBA has called a strike.
One advocate informed the bench: “They broke the locks, dragged (her) up from the bathroom.”
The bench noted: “According to the order no step should be taken against the petitioner. What is all this Mr Mehra (the Delhi government standing counsel)? How can they take the law into their hands? We want you to register an FIR immediately… What is the dispute? This is absurd. Call the officers now. Call Mr Sanjeev Narula or Mr Soni from Union of India. Who was the concerned police officer? Against a lady in the first place, can an FIR be registered against a woman under section 354D?”
The petitioner informed the bench that the office was sub-inspector Naresh kumar.
The bench was strict: “Either the police commissioner takes action or you leave it to us. If the Union Home ministry wants to put its house in order you do this or leave it to us. How can they arrest a woman on the charge of stalking? They go all the way to Mayur Vihar from Safdarjung Enclave. What is going on Mr Soni (counsel for UoI)?”
The petitioner’s lawyer said: “She had been dragged up.”
The bench asked: “Have you filed a complaint? We are not a banana republic, Mr Soni. Is this the kind of attitude a bailable offence? We want the call records. How can you enter a house without a warrant? Police call records. We would like the home ministry to take action. In the mean time we want you make list of all the material to be seized the “daily diary and file”.
Delhi counsel Mehra said: “He (the SI) is on his way to court.”
Advocate Kirti Utpal said: “She has been dragged naked from the bathroom. It was 10:30 am when we came to know about it and it is essential for us to call a strike.”
The bench said: “We will refer it to the CBI. The UoI has no objections. We want to see this investigating officer. We want the entire record. It’s so strange all offence under 354 ABCD start with the impression that “Any Man”. Strange that it is registered against a woman.
“It amounts to criminal contempt. What are the offences against the police?”
The petitioner said: “The police came in a private Mercedes car with the complainant. Illegal detention, Harassing modesty of a woman, house trespass.
The DCP entered the court room. DCP SE District, Romil Banniyal. With his was acting SHO Sanjay Rawat, Safdarjung.
The bench asked the DCP: “In the first place an FIR registered under section 354 D (stalking) against a woman? Tell us how you can register it?”
A lawyer or the petitioner said: “People want to grab her property and the police is under their influence.”
Mehra informed the court that the IO is also on his way.
The bench asked: “The IO led the police party? Tell us what action have you taken? Have you registered the FIR?”
The petitioner’s lawyer said: “The FIR was against the man and nothing was against this lady. The main accused is also a lawyer and a case of stalking is against him. Bail was cancelled against him too.”
At that the bench asked: “How can it be a bailable offence? What is the name of magistrate?”
Justice Siddharth Mridul said that he wanted IO Naresh Kumar to be in court.”
The bench was informed that the SHO was trying his best to make available his presence. The complaint said: “SI ne Deepa Arya (victim) ko dhamki di aur kaha ki darwaza nahi khola toh toode denge.”
Finally the IO arrived. The bench asked: “Who gave you the authority to break open the door?”
IO: “Mere pass warrant tha.”
Justice Mridul said: “Warrant cancel ho gaya tha. Where is your daily dairy? We want to see at what time you came and left PS.”
The IO admitted that he broke open the door.
The court has directed the DCP and home ministry to place him and other senior officials under suspension.”
—India Legal Bureau