The Delhi high court on Wednesday questioned Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka’s lawyer Abhik Chimni, asking him about the procedure followed after their bail bonds were furnished and allegedly breached with Jantar Mantar trespass act.
It questioned why the procedure prescribed under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for breach of bail bonds was not followed. “When your bail bonds are accepted, sureties are given. When a bail bond is broken there is a procedure in BNSS. Instead of following that procedure which can be forfeiting your surety etc, probably they are more benevolent to you by giving you fresh notice,” the court remarked. The high court also questioned the petitioners’ conduct, pointing out that they were at the forefront of the protest and had allegedly breached barricades despite not having permission.
The court observed that the petitioners had furnished bail bonds on October 11, the same day Jantar Mantar was de-notified as a designated protest site, before being arrested again. On October 11, Delhi Police de-notified Jantar Mantar as a designated protest site. The challenge follows an October 19 order by the special executive magistrate (SEM) at Delhi’s Mandir Marg police station extending their custody by two days.
The magistrate had 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, HT earlier reported. “Barricade is there for a purpose… and when you break the barricade, there is a chance of 10-20 people coming,” the court said, referring to incidents of arson and unrest in other countries.
The decision has been challenged separately before the Supreme Court and the Delhi high court.
Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka on Tuesday moved the Delhi high court, challenging a special executive magistrate’s order extending their judicial custody in a case concerning an alleged peace bond violation.
