Delhi High Court has rejected the PIL demanding NIA investigation into the violence that took place during CJP’s Parliament march. Delhi High Court refused to hear the petition demanding NIA investigation into the violence that took place during the ‘Sansad Chalo’ march on July 20. The court told the petitioner that he can contact the concerned authorities regarding his demand. Delhi High Court said that it is for the Center to decide whether to get the students’ protest at Jantar Mantar investigated by NIA or not.
court Said that as far as your NIA investigation is concerned, it is for the Central Government to decide. They can do so on their own (suo motu) or on the basis of a state report. You want assurance from us that this matter deserves NIA investigation. We cannot put our satisfaction in place of the satisfaction of the Central Government.
The court said that you should contact the authorities for your third demand, they will take a decision on it. There is a method for this in the law, you use that method. Sinha said that roads are closed, metro stations are closed. This is the fundamental right of the people.
The central government should decide the investigation
The court said, so, we are not saying anything on that. We are only talking about legal issues. Section 6 of the NIA Act is applicable. You give a presentation to the concerned officials, we will ask them to take a decision on your point. Sinha showed some photographs related to the demonstration to the court.
The court said that we are not forming any opinion on what we see in the pictures. This is a matter of facts which should be investigated under the direction and supervision of the competent authority. We cannot reach any conclusion just by looking at the videos and pictures. Sinha said that the central government should be asked to consider this. The court asked why should we do this? Sinha said that this is a matter of fundamental rights.
The court said that we know about the fundamental rights. Here we are focusing on the legal aspect. The court sought the Centre’s opinion. SG Tushar Mehta said that I agree with the court’s interpretation regarding the NIA Act. If they are limiting it to another agency then broadly it seems like a cross FIR. Notice was issued earlier (in some other case).
Know what the petitioner demanded
The court said that the demand is for investigation, not interrogation. The investigation phase comes only after the FIR. It is the job of the officials to decide which agency will investigate. Petitioner’s lawyer Varun Sinha said that any other specialized agency like NIA or CBI. Or SIT can be formed. The court said that there is a provision in the Delhi Police Establishment Act as to when CBI can take over any investigation.
We are not saying that we cannot give instructions to CBI. The situation is different in the case of NIA. CBI also depends on the progress made in the investigation of the main agency. If the court is not satisfied, a CBI investigation can be ordered.
Earlier, the Delhi High Court has sought opinion from the Central Government on the PIL demanding NIA investigation into the violence in the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) demonstration and Parliament march. On the demand for investigation by NIA into the performance of CJP, the court asked, tell us what is the legal procedure to enforce the jurisdiction of NIA? A PIL was heard in the Delhi High Court demanding an NIA investigation into the protests by ‘Cockroach Janata Party’.
Demand for NIA investigation into violence in CJP protest
During the hearing of the case in the court of Delhi High Court Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tejas Karia, lawyer Barun Kumar Sinha appeared on behalf of petitioner Satish Kumar Agarwal, former vice president of Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha. SG Tushar Mehta appeared on behalf of the Central Government and said that notice can be issued in this case and other cases.
Chief Justice of Delhi High Court Devendra Kumar Upadhyay said that we have seen your demands. Tell us what is the legal procedure to enforce the jurisdiction of NIA? NIA is not an interrogating agency, rather it is an investigating agency. The question of investigation arises only after the FIR is registered. In such a situation, when the FIR has been registered, the legal authority will take recourse to Section 6. How can you file this petition?
The court asked the petitioner’s lawyer what the investigation is? This is done in case of any reported crime. For this it is necessary to file an FIR. If NIA has to investigate a specific crime, then a recommendation is sent to the Center and the Center takes a decision on it. How can you ask us to get the investigation done first and then get it investigated by NIA?
FIR registered against unruly crowd
The Chief Justice asked the petitioner to read Section 6 of the NIA Act. (This provision relates to the investigation of ‘scheduled offences’. The petitioner said that once I say that this case is appropriate considering the seriousness of the crime.
The court said that its decision whether this case is suitable or not depends on two things. First of all there should be an FIR, after that the police officer will send it to the state government and the state government will send it to the Centre. If the Center finds it right, then it can hand over the investigation of the FIR to the NIA. You are asking us to form an opinion that this case is appropriate. This work has been entrusted to the Central Government. Can we substitute our opinion for their opinion about the suitability of the case for investigation by the NIA?
The court said that as we have said, NIA is an investigating agency. Under Section 6, the Central Government can also send any case to the NIA for investigation. The petitioner said that an FIR has been registered against the unruly crowd and this situation is affecting the entire country.
Read this also- Jantar Mantar Protest: Twinkle Khanna-Varun Dhawan raised the voice of students, reacted on NEET protest
Leave a Reply