Detention for about seven hours, curtained police vehicles, no arrest memos and no medical examination before a Magistrate is what Rajya Sabha MP and DYFI National President A.A. Rahim alleges in a writ petition under Article 32 over the October 11 protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar in Delhi.
New Delhi: Rajya Sabha MP A.A. Rahim, who is also the National President of the Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI), has moved the Supreme Court claiming that DYFI office-bearers, Central Committee members and activists were illegally detained at Connaught Place on October 11 and assaulted while in custody. The allegations are untested, no response from the Delhi Police or the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) is available, and the Court has expressed no view on them. [A.A. Rahim v. Union of India and Others]
The material available does not give a diary number, and neither the Bench nor a listing date has been reported. The writ petition comes with an application for urgent interim directions.
What the petition says happened
According to the petition, protesters were forcibly put into police vehicles with curtained windows and assaulted in custody. It claims they were held for about seven hours, taken to Surajmal Stadium, and released at around 7:30 PM.
The petition goes on to allege that arrest memos were never drawn up, relatives were not told, and the detainees were neither produced before a Magistrate nor medically examined. It also states that plainclothes police stayed present while injured protesters were examined for medico-legal purposes at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, so they could not speak freely to the doctors.
The legal basis
Articles 14, 19, 21 and 22 of the Constitution are said to have been violated, and the petitioner cites D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal and other rulings on personal liberty and safeguards in custody. The petition also draws on the Supreme Court’s directions of October 11 in the protest proceedings, which state:
There shall be no illegal detention, particularly in cases of peaceful unarmed assemblage of people
What Rahim wants from the Court
First, a declaration that the October 11 detention of DYFI members at Connaught Place was illegal and breached Articles 14, 19, 21 and 22. Second, a declaration that curtained, compartmentalised or sealed vehicles cannot serve as places of detention or carry detainees to unauthorised locations.
Further prayers include directions to stop custodial torture, assault and cruel or degrading treatment, a court-monitored independent inquiry, an FIR against officers found responsible, and an independent medical examination of the injured protesters without police presence. The petitioner also asks that CCTV footage, GPS and movement logs, PCR and wireless logs, vehicle logbooks and duty rosters for October 11 be preserved and produced.
Proposed guidelines for protest detentions
The petitioner further asks the Union to frame guidelines on protest detentions. These would allow detainees to be taken only to police stations or notified custody locations, ban covered or blacked-out vehicles, require CCTV and body cameras, and require women detainees to be handled by women officers under Section 43(5) of the BNSS. They would also guarantee access to lawyers and relatives and apply the D.K. Basu requirements to all forces, including the CRPF. The petition also seeks identification of all personnel involved by name, designation and unit, and visible name tags for personnel on protest duty, citing Section 36(a) of the BNSS. Interim directions are sought pending the framing of guidelines.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
Case Details: A.A. Rahim v. Union of India and Others; writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution; diary number, Bench and listing date not reported.
Appearances: Petition drafted by Advocates Anirudh K.P. and Fidal Tom; filed through Advocate-on-Record Subhash Chandran K.R.