The Delhi high court in a special hearing on Wednesday declined to entertain Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka’s petition challenging Special Executive Magistrate’s (SEM) order extending their judicial custody in an alleged bond-of-peace violation case, following their decision to withdraw the same.
Seeking immediate release on personal bond rather than a surety, the two said that the order was contrary to a Delhi high court’s ruling in Aldanish Rein vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr, in which it was held that an arrested person should be released on a personal bond once surety bonds are submitted, pending their verification. The CJP leaders decided to withdraw the plea after justice Subramonium Prasad raised questions concerning the maintainability of the petition. The Delhi police represented by additional solicitor general Chetan Sharma and standing counsel Ashish Dixit, also opposed its petition. Emphasising that personal liberty is sacrosanct, the court noted that when a prescribed legal remedy is available, one should follow the established procedure rather than approach the high court directly. “When you go again, the challenge to denotification is pending in the Supreme Court. Notification is yet not stayed. You go there and take a step again. When all these questions are there… The two petitioners out here are at the forefront, correct? Again I am not saying good or bad. There may be persons who might not be in your control and who may do things. We are seeing what is happening outside our country. What started as a student protest has now gone into arson, looting, burning. You started with something that you say is peaceful. The point is you cannot then control. For that purpose, you take police permission. Police permission is not just to stop you. “They (Delhi police) are more benevolent to you by giving fresh notice. The reason for the first bond came true: you had a tendency to break the peace for a second time, which you did.
Das and Ranka approached the high court against SEM’s October 19 order to extend their custody by two days. When you go there and break a barricade, the chances of 10 or 20 more people in violation of Section 163 BNSS is very bright. On October 11, Delhi Police de-notified Jantar Mantar as a designated protest site, a decision that has been separately challenged before the Supreme Court and the Delhi high court.
The executive magistrate at Mandir Marg police station cited concerns over public peace and security, and said the CJP leaders showed “no respect for law” by repeatedly calling for protests at de-notified sites, supporting Delhi Police’s contention that their release could pose an imminent threat to public order. Police permission is also to prevent persons who are unwanted elements to join your group and spoil your name,” the court said. The court said the Delhi Police had shown “benevolence” by issuing a fresh notice to the duo despite their alleged breach of the bond. Are the authorities not right in putting you to stricter rule?” the court said.
The court observed that the appropriate remedy for the two CJP leaders was to challenge the SEM’s order before the sessions court.
