The Delhi Excessive Court docket Tuesday sought the response of Delhi Police on a plea by Punjab Police in search of to quash FIR for allegedly abducting BJP chief Tajinder Pal Singh Bagga from his residence right here. The excessive courtroom issued discover to Delhi Police, the Delhi authorities, and Mr Bagga on the petition filed by Manpreet Singh, SP Rural, SAS Nagar in Punjab.
Justice Anu Malhotra mentioned the respondents shall file their replies inside 4 weeks and listed the matter for additional listening to on July 26.
The courtroom, nonetheless, didn’t subject a discover at this stage on one other petition filed by the Punjab authorities in search of the quashing of two orders handed by a Delhi district courtroom – for search and manufacturing of Mr Bagga and his subsequent launch from the custody of Punjab Police with out giving it a listening to.
The excessive courtroom, which listed the petition on Might 26, mentioned it will undergo your entire report of the case earlier than coming to any conclusion on whether or not to subject discover on the petition.
On Might 6, the Punjab Police had arrested Mr Bagga from his Janakpuri residence right here however the Delhi Police had introduced him again from Haryana, alleging that its Punjab counterpart had not knowledgeable it in regards to the arrest.
Following his arrest by the Punjab Police in a case referring to allegedly making provocative statements, selling enmity, and making legal intimidation, the Delhi Police registered an FIR of abduction towards Punjab Police personnel on Might 6 late at night time.
Punjab Police, in its plea, claimed that after they reached Janakpuri Police Station on Might 6 to tell it about Mr Bagga’s arrest, the Delhi Police refused to cooperate with it and illegally detained them.
It additional mentioned the Delhi Police lodged a false and fabricated FIR towards Punjab Police underneath sections 452 (house-trespass after preparation for harm, assault, or wrongful restraint), 392 (theft), 342 (wrongful confinement), 365 (kidnapping), 295A (deliberate and malicious acts, meant to outrage spiritual emotions of any class by insulting its faith or spiritual beliefs) and 34 (widespread intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and obtained search warrant by concealing the related and materials information of the lawful arrest of Mr Bagga, after which Punjab Police officers have been detained by Haryana Police and disadvantaged of the lawful custody of the accused.
“Due to this fact, the unlawful means and process utilized by the Delhi Police officers together with Haryana Police officers by utilizing false and concocted FIR which was used to impede the Punjab police officers from duly discharging their obligation and relatively in connivance assisted the accused in releasing him from the lawful custody of Punjab state police officers underneath the garb of the fabricated story of accused being kidnapped by unknown individuals,” the petition mentioned.
It alleged that the Delhi Police’s conduct is completely doubtful, unlawful, unwarranted, malafide, and unauthorised, who not solely misled the courtroom by aiding the accused but in addition hid the truth that the particular person whom they’re presenting as a sufferer within the FIR is the accused and has been arrested by the Punjab Police in one other case.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the Punjab authorities, mentioned he was solely in search of issuance of discover on the petition at this stage and contended that the Justice of the Peace had handed the order for the discharge of Mr Bagga with out listening to Punjab Police regardless of the officers standing outdoors his residence, and pure justice was disregarded.
Further Solicitor Basic (ASG) Sanjay Jain, showing for Delhi Police, contended that the Punjab Police’s petition was not maintainable because the Commissioner of Police was not made a celebration to the petition even when critical allegations have been made towards the pressure.
“What’s the locus of Punjab Police to file this petition? It was not made an accused within the FIR (for abduction)…” he argued.
Senior advocate Kirti Uppal, showing for Mr Bagga, contended that the Punjab Police got here right here to arrest the BJP chief as if he was some terrorist who was going to run away.
“The whole allegations towards me don’t incarcerate me for greater than three years. Am I a terrorist? You might be coming right here as if some terrorist goes to run away. That is an effort by a specific political occasion to point out its energy,” he argued.
The courtroom, after listening to the events, mentioned the Commissioner of Delhi Police be impleaded as a separate occasion within the petition.
Whereas rebutting the arguments of the opposite facet, Mr Singhvi mentioned, “right here the ruling occasion’s spokesperson is concerned and the Delhi Police is standing right here opposing the issuance of discover on the petition. The whole equipment is standing right here.” The Punjab Police, in its petition, mentioned the FIR and the order of search warrants and order of launch of the mentioned accused, dated Might 6, 2022, handed by the hyperlink obligation MM, Dwarka, Delhi are liable to be put aside underneath part 482 of CrPC underneath the jurisdiction of this courtroom together with all judicial/government proceedings emanating from the FIR that are an abuse of technique of regulation and non-est within the eyes of regulation.
On April 1, the Punjab Police booked Mr Bagga for alleged offences of constructing provocative statements, selling enmity, and legal intimidation. The case was registered on a criticism of AAP chief Sunny Ahluwalia, a resident of Mohali.
The FIR referred to Mr Bagga’s remarks on March 30, when he was a part of a BJP youth wing protest outdoors the residence of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal.
(This story has not been edited by NDTV workers and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Supply & Picture rights : https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/tajinder-bagga-case-high-court-asks-delhi-police-why-abduction-fir-shouldnt-be-quashed-3004976
Below Part 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “truthful use” for functions equivalent to criticism, remark, information reporting, educating, scholarship, and analysis. Honest use is a use permitted by copyright statute which may in any other case be infringing.”