18 Jun 2022 5:18 AM GMT
"No one is above law and no one can be allowed to indulge in violence and riots in the name of religion," observed a Delhi Court while rejecting a plea filed by an accused in connection with Jahangirpuri violence case, seeking extension of interim bail plea for the purpose of further education. Clashes had broken out in April in city's Jahangirpuri area during a Hanuman...
"No one is above law and no one can be allowed to indulge in violence and riots in the name of religion," observed a Delhi Court while rejecting a plea filed by an accused in connection with Jahangirpuri violence case, seeking extension of interim bail plea for the purpose of further education.
Clashes had broken out in April in city's Jahangirpuri area during a Hanuman Jayanti procession.
Additional Sessions Judge Virender Kumar Kharta turned down the plea of one Neeraj Sarkar, who was granted interim bail of 90 days for appearing in his 12th class examinations. He sought extension for a period of 90 days for preparing for entrance exams for his further career.
Observing that his rights were not absolute in nature and are subject to the rights of other people and law and order situation, the Court observed thus:
"The accused/applicant cannot take the shed of his fundamental rights under Article 25 to 28 of the Constitution of India by indulging in violence and riots."
While noting that education is a fundamental right of any citizen, the Court said that the purpose of interim bail was already completed and that the accused had not produced any material as to in which entrance exam he had to appear.
"The accused/applicant can apply for the entrance exam while remaining in JC also and there is no bar in this regard. This court is of the considered opinion that the submissions of the Ld. Counsel for the accused/applicant for extension of interim bail of the accused/applicant for a period of 90 days for the purpose of preparing for entrance exams for higher studies and applying for the entrance exams / courses is vague in nature," the Court said.
The Court further opined that while all the persons are equally entitled to the freedom of conscience and right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion, however, the same is not absolute and is subject to public order, morality, health and other provisions of the Constitution of India.
"The members of unlawful assembly are involved in riots. Several police officials and public persons have sustained injuries. The unlawful assembly of which the accused/applicant was a member, have damaged the public properties due to which the law and order situation in the area became tensed and as per the reply of IO, situation is still tensed," the Court said.
Accordingly, keeping in view the gravity of the offence, the fact that investigation was still pending and that the purpose of interim bail had been fulfilled, the Court rejected the plea.
The FIR was registered under sec. 147, 148, 149, 186, 353, 332, 323, 427, 436, 307 ,120B of the Indian Penal Code and sec. 25 of the Arms Act.
Click Here To Read Order