Today, On 21st May, In the December 2023 Parliament security breach case, the Delhi Police told the High Court that they had “duly supplied” the arrest grounds to the accused, countering allegations of procedural lapses in the high-profile matter.
New Delhi: The Delhi Police informed the Delhi High Court that they had “duly supplied” the grounds of arrest to the accused involved in the December 2023 Parliament security breach case.
This statement was made in response to the court’s inquiry about whether the grounds of arrest had been provided to the accused.
Before a bench of Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, The prosecutor stated
“Our contention is that we have given them the grounds of arrest. Case diary records it, the arrest memo also states that grounds of arrest were given, judicial orders of the trial court and our remand application would also show the same,”
The high court heard these submissions and reserved its decision on the bail applications of accused Neelam Azad and Mahesh Kumawat, who were arrested in connection with the case.
Although the order on the bail pleas was reserved on May 20, the court revisited the issue of whether the grounds of arrest had been provided.
Also Read: Delhi High Court Seeks Police’s Reply on Bail Plea of Parliament Security Breach Accused
This incident occurred on the anniversary of the 2001 Parliament terror attack when accused Sagar Sharma and Manoranjan D allegedly jumped into the Lok Sabha chamber from the public gallery during Zero Hour, released yellow gas from canisters, and shouted slogans before being subdued by several MPs. Concurrently, two other accused Amol Shinde and Azad reportedly sprayed colored gas from canisters while chanting “tanashahi nahi chalegi (dictatorship won’t work)” outside the Parliament.
The court had previously asked the accused why they chose December 13, the anniversary of the 2001 attack, for their protest at Parliament, especially when designated protest areas were available in the capital.
Also Read: Update: Delhi Court Extends Judicial Custody of Parliament Security Breach Accused
It also sought clarification from the police on whether carrying or using a smoke canister inside and outside Parliament constituted an offense under the UAPA and if it qualified as a terrorist activity.
The prosecution opposed the bail pleas, stating that preliminary inquiries indicated that Azad and Shinde were associates of Sharma and Manoranjan D, and that they collectively participated in the terror act.
The high court was informed that the trial court has scheduled the matter for a hearing on June 5 to discuss the framing of charges and instructed the trial court to proceed with the arguments on that date.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
