Supreme Court Directs Delhi Police SIT Probe Into Assault On Lawyers Protesting Against BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra
"You seem more interested in prosecuting the BCI Chairman, than the assailants. He was never there at the [site]", J Bagchi to petitioners.
The Supreme Court today directed the Delhi Police Commissioner to constitute a Special Investigation Team to probe the allegations pertaining to assault on certain lawyers in Bar Council of India premises when they were protesting against BCI Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra.
A bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana passed the order after hearing Advocate Prashant Bhushan (for petitioners/victim lawyers). The petitioners filed the present petition challenging the Delhi High Court which rejected a plea for CBI probe on the ground that they had alternative remedy of filing a complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate.
After perusing the averments in the police complaint made by the petitioners on August 22, and to avoid prejudice to the respondents who had not been issued notice, the bench passed certain directions to ensure that the incident is appropriately investigated, and the investigation is taken to logical conclusion. The directions issued were as follows,
(i) Commissioner of Police, Delhi to ensure that complaint made by the petitioners to the IP Estate SHO is appropriately investigated and for that purpose, an SIT is constituted, headed by a fairly senior police officer (in the rank of DCP);
(ii) Petitioners may meanwhile avail their statutory remedy before jurisdictional Metropolitan Magistrate.
During the hearing, Bhushan contended that investigation by the CBI or an independent SIT was sought as Delhi Police is under executive control of the government and Manan Kumar Mishra, the BCI Chief, is a Member of Parliament belonging to the ruling party.
When Justice Bagchi noted that similar averment is open to be raised for the CBI as well, the counsel pointed out a distinction, saying that CBI Chief is not selected by the government alone. The High-Powered 3-member Selection Committee in fact includes the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India.
Bhushan further submitted that Bar Council's job was to take professional misconduct action against the lawyers who beat up the protesting lawyers, but it did no such thing. "Mr Manan Mishra's statement implies he knew the lawyers. He says these cockroaches were protesting, some lawyers came and drove them away. Therefore, instead of BCI taking action for professional misconduct for roughing up other lawyers, he is doing opposite", he urged.
Bhushan also pointed out that the petitioners were asked by the Court to approach the Delhi Police and they did. But no FIR had been registered based on their complaint despite a lapse of 2 months.
When Justice Bagchi posed that it might be better for the petitioners to take recourse of a private complaint before the Magistrate, as Magistrate also has power of investigation, Bhushan claimed that they did not have access to the CCTV footage. "The Court will give you access, your clients have a right to fair [investigation] and we are here to ensure that. Only question is of methodology", Justice Bagchi responded.
Insofar as Bhushan's submission that the petitioners were not aware as to who were their assaulters, CJI remarked that the Magistrate can find that out before taking cognizance. Justice Bagchi conveyed that the bench would ask a senior police officer to handle the investigation of the "crime" and submit a report, without being influenced as to the cognizability of the offense. Meanwhile, the CJI added, the petitioners may file complaint before the Magistrate, as ultimately cognizance would have to be taken there only.
At one point, Justice Bagchi also noted that the complaint to the police would have to be against "unknown" persons. On this, Bhushan said that atleast one person's name is known - BCI Chief Manan Mishra's. The judge pointed out that the BCI Chief was not present at the time of alleged assault. However, Bhushan alleged that the accused-lawyers came to beat up the protesting lawyers at Manan Mishra's insistence.
"It seems you are more interested in prosecuting the Chairman rather than the assailants", Justice Bagchi remarked. Bhushan reiterated that the BCI Chief was the one who encourage the accused-lawyers, who then roughed up the protesting lawyers. He also added that the petitioners seemed to have some names, if not all. "Let investigation go on", Justice Bagchi responded.