'They aren’t gangsters': Court rejects police plea to produce Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi in handcuffs

News Network
June 6, 2021

khalid_saifi.jpg

New Delhi, June 6: A court here turned down a plea of Delhi Police to produce former JNU student Umar Khalid and activist Khalid Saifi in handcuffs before trial courts, noting that “they are not gangsters”.

The plea application which came up for hearing before Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav sought to produce the 2020 Delhi riots accused in “handcuffs in both hands from back side”, contending that they are “high-risk prisoners”.

The judge dismissed the plea observing that it is devoid of merits and filed in a mechanical manner and without application of mind by the high echelons of the Delhi Police and prison authority.

“The accused persons, who are sought to be produced in fetters and handcuffs, are admittedly not previous convicts. They are not even gangsters,” the Additional Sessions Judge stated in an order dated June 5.

He further said that the plea is not required at this stage as the accused are not being produced in the court physically due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

The judge also noted the replies submitted by the Superintendent of Mandoli and Tihar jail, Additional DCP (Special Cell) and DCP of third battalion of Delhi Police, on the plea.

The DCP told the court that in the aftermath of an attempt made by armed assailants to free an undertrial prisoner at GTB Hospital, the police had decided to request the court for permission to handcuff high-risk prisoners who are prone to escape.

“As part of the exercise, the current application for handcuffing UTPs Umar Khalid and Khalid Saifi was moved for the consideration of Hon'ble Court,” the senior police officer stated in a reply submitted to the court on April 26.

However, in the reply given by the Additional DCP of Special Cell, it was stated that no such application seeking to produce both the accused in handcuffs, was filed before any court or other authority. 

Comments

Ramesh Mishra
 - 
Thursday, 17 Jun 2021

UMAR KHALID AND KHALID SAIFI IN HANDCUFFS, NEW DELHI INDIA
They have been maliciously prosecuted and entitled to compensation.

Ramesh Mishra
Victoria, British Columbia, CANADA

Ahmed Ali Kulai
 - 
Monday, 7 Jun 2021

Scenario: Now after the court rejection to handcuff these 2 students to produce in the court, police may create a scene by forcing these two students to run away while moving to court, so that they can say to court that we asked court to allow to handcuff but court refused.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 14,2024

srirang.jpg

Bengaluru: The Prime Minister Narendra Modi led union government has requested the Karnataka High Court to direct the Mandya district administration and the state government to clear a madrasa operating within the premises of the historic Jama Masjid in Srirangapatna.

The Waqf Board, opposing this move, has claimed the mosque as its property and defended the right to conduct madrasa activities there.

The matter was brought before a division bench headed by Chief Justice N V Anjaria following a public interest litigation filed by a person named Abhishek Gowda from Kabbalu village in Kanakapura taluk. The petition alleged “unauthorised madrasa activities” within the mosque.

Representing the Central government, Additional Solicitor General of India for High Court of Karnataka, K Arvind Kamath argued that the Jama Masjid was designated as a protected monument in 1951, yet unauthorised madrasa operations continue there.

He noted that concerns over potential law and order issues have so far prevented any intervention. Kamath urged the court to direct the Mandya district administration to take action and vacate the madrasa from the mosque.

In defence, lawyers for the state government and the Waqf Board contested this request, stating that the Waqf Board had been recognised as the owner of the property since 1963 and, thus, conducting madrasa activities there is lawful.

After hearing both sides, the bench adjourned the case for further arguments, scheduling the next hearing for November 20.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.