Click the Play button to listen to article

Member of Parliament in the Rajya Sabha and CPI(M) leaderJohn Brittas has written to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant seeking his intervention against the "appalling incident" of police brutality perpetrated against him during the protest over Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. 

He has stated that a credible investigation cannot be left exclusively to a chain of command whose personnel or supervisory officers may themselves be implicated. He has requested the communication be placed before an appropriate Bench of the Supreme Court for consideration, in accordance with law, of such judicial intervention as may be warranted, including the possibility of taking cognizance or directing appropriate proceedings under Article 32 of the Constitution.

Describing his incident, he has stated that he was forcefully dragged while demanding the resignation to Gyanesh Kumar: "At around 12.30 p.m. today, having learnt that some youth activists were being assaulted and detained, I reached the Connaught Place area and began speaking to journalists. I was peacefully exercising my democratic right to speak to the press. Nevertheless, personnel of the Delhi Police and the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) forcibly manhandled and dragged me for approximately 50 metres, despite repeated assertions by me and the journalists present that I am a sitting Member of Parliament. A few police personnel lifted me bodily into the air and carried me towards a police vehicle, treating a sitting Member of Parliament as though I were an object to be hauled away. There was no provocation whatsoever to justify this high-handed action." 

In the letter to the CJI, he has said that the incident raises grave questions concerning personal liberty, the right to peaceful expression, police accountability and compliance with the constitutional safeguards that the Supreme Court has time and again upheld and reaffirmed through its authoritative judgments.

He has said that the assault occurred within hours of the Supreme Court directions today that peaceful protesters should not be detained.

"It therefore calls for urgent judicial scrutiny as to whether the constitutional protections reaffirmed by this Hon'ble Court were respected in practice," he has said. 

He adds that the brutality escalated after he was put inside the vehicle.

"The police personnel assaulted me and pinned me to the seat. The assault continued even after I identified myself as a Member of Parliament. My status as an elected representative did not deter them from subjecting me to this degrading and physically abusive treatment. I was then abandoned on the wayside as there was an order from concerned DCP to release me as he found the detention completely unlawful."

He has mentioned several recordings made by journalists and bystanders. 

John says that these are not isolated incidents of violence by police, as yesterday several opposition leaders, including former Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, were detained.

Brittas has further said that peaceful protest cannot be treated as a threat merely because it challenges those in power.

"The authorities may agree or disagree with these demands, but they cannot answer them with physical violence. The Government cannot intimidate democracy into silence. It cannot deploy the police as an instrument of political retaliation. It cannot substitute the force of the baton for the force of argument. And it cannot expect the people to surrender their constitutional freedoms merely because those in power find dissent inconvenient. Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution protect freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, while Article 21 safeguards life and personal liberty. Any restraint or detention must have a lawful basis, and any use of force must be necessary, lawful and proportionate. The brutal assault, the circumstances in which I was taken away, and the manner in which I was released demand urgent scrutiny under these constitutional guarantees and the applicable laws and Rules governing police conduct and detention." 

Reliefs sought 

Brittas has particularly sought directions for an independent, court-supervised investigation by a Special Investigation Team comprising officers unconnected with the Delhi Police and CRPF personnel involved, or by another independent agency considered appropriate by the Court.

As per his communication, the investigation should establish the identity and role of every personnel involved, examine the responsibility of supervisory officers, and determine the circumstances and legal basis of my removal, assault and release. A status report may be directed to be filed before the Court within a time-bound period.

Pending such consideration, he has further asked for urgent directions are also necessary to preserve all relevant evidence, including complete and unedited video recordings, footages, vehicle identification, deployment and movement records, duty rosters, orders and instructions, wireless and control-room logs, and records relating to my detention and release. 







Tags: