Court grants three-day police custody of three accused in India Gate protest case

New Delhi [India], December 1 (ANI): The Patiala House Court on Monday remanded three accused, Ravjot, Gurkirat and Kranti, to three days' police custody. The court also directed that the women accused be interrogated exclusively by a female police officer.
These arrests are linked to the case concerning the protest and slogan-shouting incident near India Gate.
Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Aridaman Singh Cheema passed the order, while the accused Ayisha Wafiya was remanded to three days' judicial custody. Delhi Police had sought 10 days' custody for all four accused.
The court has already remanded eight other accused persons to seven days' judicial custody.
The direction for female officer interrogation was issued in view of the defence counsel's allegation that the women accused were threatened with rape.
Delhi Police arrested Kranti alias Priyanshu and Ayisha Wafiya on Monday.
While seeking remand of the four accused, the police submitted that some of the accused had attended an event organised by the Radical Students Union (RSU) in Hyderabad on February 21 and 22. The police said the accused needs to be interrogated regarding the Hyderabad event, the identification of other involved individuals, and the source of funding.
The remand application also referred to certain videos and WhatsApp chats recovered during the investigation. The Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) argued that the accused were participating in a protest against rising pollution.
"Why was the 'Hidma' slogan raised during the protest?" the APP asked, adding that Ravjot Kaur was seen raising slogans. It was further submitted that the accused Gurkirat Kaur is the President of the Shaheed Bhagat Singh Group and that the protest "was not planned in a day; it had been organised much earlier."
The APP argued that the accused's mobile phones, the Hyderabad angle, funding sources, and other aspects still need to be investigated. Gurkirat, who was initially not at India Gate, had later arrived at the protest and was arrested on the spot, the APP said. Police custody was therefore required to trace the "key conspirator" and the funding.
During the hearing, defence counsel argued that the accused had faced rape threats and questioned how police custody could be justified under such circumstances. They said the accused had cooperated with the investigation, had already been interrogated, and had spent two days in police custody earlier. Their mobile phones had been seized, all questions answered, and the offences invoked carry a maximum punishment of less than five years. "Therefore, the Arnesh Kumar judgment - which discourages unnecessary arrests - should apply," the counsel argued.
On Saturday, the court refused Delhi Police's request for custody of eight accused persons and remanded them to two days' judicial custody. The accused - Vishnu Tiwari, Akshay, Sameer Fayis, Banka Akash, Prakash Kumar Gupta, Aahan Arun Upadhyay, Vagisha Anudeep and Ayisha Wafiya - were produced before the duty judge at her residence, where the police had sought seven days' custody.
Police had argued that custody was necessary to investigate the role of the accused in relation to the Radical Students Union (RSU), a banned organisation. However, Duty JMFC Anjali Singh rejected the plea, stating, "Upon careful consideration of the record and submissions, I am of the view that, at this stage, a grant of seven days' police custody remand is not made out. Accordingly, the application moved by the IO for seven days' PC remand is dismissed and disallowed."
Delhi Police had also stated that videos show the accused, Ravjot Kaur, Ayisha Wafiyah, and others attending RSU programmes, and that complete details regarding organisers, funding, and participants are yet to be obtained. The IO had further submitted that Ravjot was yet to be arrested and needed to be confronted with the other accused.
The police said they were retrieving details of the accused persons' social media accounts and needed to interrogate them about posts and material found on those accounts. Multiple WhatsApp groups linked to the accused were being analysed and required confrontation. Investigators also claimed non-cooperation by the accused and said the source of the pepper spray allegedly used during the protest had not yet been identified. Several co-accused were still absconding.
The police argued that Naxalism continues to be a serious national concern, drawing youth away from the mainstream and hindering development.
The court, however, noted that: "The IO submitted that they are still in the process of investigating the larger role of the accused in the offence committed. However, the exact reason for seeking police custody remand of each accused person could not be substantiated."
The court also observed that the arrest of other accused persons - including one who had already been arrested in another FIR at Police Station Parliament Street - could not be considered a valid ground for seeking police custody. (ANI)