The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a PIL demanding a court-monitored, six-month timeline for the Red Fort blast trial, stressing the trial has “not even started.” The petitioner withdrew the plea after the Court said no directions could be issued.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to hear a public interest litigation (PIL) that asked for a special committee to supervise and speed up the Red Fort bomb blast trial, and to ensure that the trial is completed within six months.
The Court made it clear that it cannot monitor a criminal trial that has not even begun.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela strongly questioned the idea of supervising something that has not started.
ALSO READ: Red Fort Blast Case: Delhi Court Extends NIA Custody of Accused Amir Rashid Ali Again
Justice Gedela remarked,
“What is this? It’s not even started, and you want us to monitor how the trial is to be conducted? It hasn’t started yet, and you want us to monitor? I can understand if it had been pending for years, but it’s not even started.”
Chief Justice Upadhyaya also said that the petitioner did not show how their own fundamental rights were violated.
He stated,
“This is a PIL petition based on your experience that the previous trials have taken years. And, therefore, we should assume this trial will also take time? You want the supervision of the investigation, of the filing of the chargesheet. We should supervise.”
The petitioner’s counsel argued that directions from the Court would give confidence to the victims of the blast.
He pointed out that earlier terror-related trials have taken more than 25 years, and even the earlier Red Fort terror attack trial continued for over seven years.
Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, appearing for the Central government, argued that the PIL was wrongly filed and did not give full facts.
He said the petitioner failed to inform the Court that the investigation is no longer with the Delhi Police but has been handed over to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
He added that the case will now be handled under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). After hearing all sides, the Court said it would not pass any directions on the matter, and the petitioner withdrew the plea.
The PIL was filed by former MLA Dr Pankaj Pushkar, who had demanded a court-monitored committee to supervise all stages of the trial, daily hearings, and completion of the entire trial within six months.
In the plea, the petitioner described personal concerns as a single parent, stating that he feels
“the tremor of every anxious question echoing across households: ‘Why did this happen? Who is responsible? Are we safe?'”
The plea said that the blast was an attack on one of India’s most important symbols of sovereignty and has left citizens scared, grieving, and searching for answers.
It added that in normal criminal cases, families usually understand why a crime happened, but in this case the victims’ families still have no clarity.
The petition further stated,
“In ordinary criminal jurisprudence, victims or their families usually understand the basic circumstances, motives, or mens rea behind the crime that has taken their loved ones. But in the present case, the victims’ families remain in complete darkness. They do not know why their loved ones were killed, what purpose the attack served, or which forces orchestrated such a devastating blow at the heart of the Republic. This absence of explanation deepens the trauma and violates the victims’ fundamental right to truth, a right recognised as an integral part of dignity under Article 21.”
Read More Reports On Red Fort Blast Case
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
