Delhi High Court Hears PIL Alleging Excessive Force By Police During CJP's 'Sansad Chalo' March [LIVE UPDATES]

Court: This very incident, his wife instituted a petition. Appeal also was filed. Matter was disposed of as per their satisfaction. If you are still aggrieved, approach authorities.

The matter is now listed on September 11.

Court now takes up item 54( relating to forceful removal of Wangchuk).

Court dictates order: Issue notice (items 56 and 57). Heard counsels. Let a counter affidavit be filed (by Delhi Police and Union of India) within four weeks. In meantime, we direct that the relevant record in relation to incident as mentioned in writ petitions including the cctv footage, videography, if any, shall be preserved in accordance with SOP in place issued by Delhi Police or the UOI.

Court: Without making any observation we are only asking you to file your response and preserve records as per your SOP.

Raju: If a cognizable offence is made out police will take action if it comes to their knowledge.

Court: There is SC judgment in Anita Thakur case saying that these wrongs remedy can be taken under public law as well.

We will ask them to preserve it (cctv footages): Court says

Has it been isolated individual incident situation would have been different. You would have been correct in asking them to move magistrate and file complaint. This is not such an incident. We are not saying whatever they are sayingis correct. We are also not in position to verify videos. We only ask you to file your responses. We will pass separate order in 54. But please file response in 56 and 57.

Court: Mr. Raju, two three questions. Is it case of some isolated incidents? Perhaps no. Two, if it was unlawful assembly as you say, there is law how to deal with it. Judgment of SC in Ram Lila ground. If these issues are raisrd in PIL how can you say every individual should lodge FIR?

Raju: If you have evidence in form of video, you can file a complaint. This is petition for hogging limelight and it is not maintainable.

Raju; Petition though looks in first blush very attractive is not so. It is based on suppression pf facts. Based on social media recordings. Social media is known to be tampered with. These are all publicity petitions, with ulterior motive. Persons allegedly beaten not come forth FIR. These are persons who want to take undue advantage. The petitions do not warrant issuance of notice.