[Red Fort Violence] "Second Arrest Prima Facie Illegal, Abuse Of Rule Of Law": Deep Sidhu Argues As Delhi Court Reserves Order In His Bail Plea In ASI FIR

As the Delhi Court on Saturday reserved orders in the bail application filed by Deep Sidhu in connection with the second FIR registered by the Archaeological Survey of India alleging damage to the historic monument and vandalism by rioters, Advocate Abhishek Gupta appearing on his behalf argued before the Court that the conduct of the investigating agency for arresting him was prima facie illegal and arbitrary and was a sheer abuse of Rule of Law.During the course of hearing today before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Abhishek Gupta argued at length seeking grant of bail on the following major points: first, both the FIRs were identical and based on similar facts, second, having granted bail in one FIR, bail must be granted in the said FIR also and third, the arrest was illegal, mala fide and arbitrary.On FIRs being Identical and SimilarStarting with the submissions, Gupta submitted before the Court that not only were the contents of the FIRs and allegations similar, but the replies given by the Prosecution were also same as far as dealing with both the cases."I can show from the ASJ's order. I will show exactly same words, same sentences which are identical. The premium agency like Delhi Crime Branch, something like this is not acceptable. We are a country governed by Rule of Law." Gupta argued.Arguing that the two FIRs involves similar Acts and provisions, Gupta submitted that since the sessions court had already dealt with the contents, bail ought to be given in the said FIR also as all the allegations were the subject matter of the earlier bail wherein bail was granted."Two of the special Acts like PDPA and Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites Act were also invoked in the first FIR. But please look at this FIR. Only one new section from another Act is added which Prevention of Insults to National Honours Act. Under this section also, the maximum punishment is one year. A little detail has been added in the second FIR. Rest, all the allegations and incidents are identical." Gupta submitted.Conduct of Investigating Agency Prima Facie Arbitrary and IllegalArguing that Sidhu was termed as the primary conspriator by the investigating agency only because he was a popular face, Gupta submitted thus:"He was present at a wrong place, at a wrong time. His only mistake was that he was just there while some people were hoisting some flag. People were raising certain religious slogans but these slogans are similar to any other religious slogans."Furthermore, Gupta went ahead to submit that the conduct of the investigating agency and the time of arrest effected by them was grossly in violation of Article 21. He submitted: "This is a question I pose to myself and we all must ask ourselves: Why? Why did they arrest me? The time, the event of arrest is grossly illegal. They can't behave like this. We are governed by Rule of Law. This is making a mockery of the system. This is such an abuse of power. What can be a better case of abuse of power than this? There can be none. The investigating agency cannot justify the time and event of arrest." Submitting that what cannot be done directly, cannot be done indirectly also, Gupta argued that the investigating agency cannot effect the arrest as they please and that valid justifications have to be given by them.Arguing that the Crime Branch was behaving like emperors, Gupta submitted that "If this is not fraud, what is it then. Why was this arrest effected? This arrest is prima facie arbitrary, illegal, fraudulent and mala fide. It goes against the judgments laid by the Supreme Court. They cannot do what they please, even they have to be within their limits."Submissions of the ProsecutionDenying the allegations of the FIR being similar and identical, the Public Prosecutor argued before the Court that there was no answer given by the defense as to why they did not go to the Delhi High Court for quashing of the said FIR. PP argued this:"If we go by the factual matrix of the present case, it is very sure that this case was an unfortunate incident and the accused has an active role. We have CDR, and according to the Videos and CDR, his role can be seen. If both offences are committed at the same place, it doesn't mean we cannot register two FIRs."Highlighting that Sidhu might tamper with the investigation if granted bail, PP also argued that no answer was given by defense as to when a route was given to them by the Police, why did they chose not to follow it?"Red Fort is an ancient monument. They defaced it, destroyed it. It was a part of a bigger Conspiracy. Case is sensitive in nature so the bail application be rejected." PP argued.Hearing both the parties at length, the Court reserved the order for Monday.About the FIRDeep Sidhu was arrested again hours in another FIR filed by the Archaeological Survey of India after being granted bail in the FIR pertaining to red fort violence case connection with the violence that broke out during the farmer's tractor rally on...

[Red Fort Violence] "Second Arrest Prima Facie Illegal, Abuse Of Rule Of Law": Deep Sidhu Argues As Delhi Court Reserves Order In His Bail Plea In ASI FIR

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags