North-East Delhi riots: Court pulls up police over non-appearance of special public prosecutor
A court hearing on a matter related to the North-East Delhi riots on Saturday pulled up the city police over the non-appearance of the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP).
ANI
Dec 03, 2023 02:13 IST
New Delhi [India], December 3 (ANI): A court hearing on a matter related to the North-East Delhi riots on Saturday pulled up the city police over the non-appearance of the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP).
The court has issued notice to DCP (Crime) in the matter and sought a report from the Special Commissioner.
The court was holding a hearing on a bail application of Sharjeel Imam in a sedition case related to the North-East Delhi riots.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Amitabh Rawat came down heavily on Delhi Police over the non-appearance of SPP, stating that he was seeking passover in the riot matters.
Expressing his displeasure, ASJ Rawat issued a notice to DCP, Crime, directing a personal appearance through the Special Commissioner at the next date of hearing.
"Let notice be issued to DCP (Crime) to appear in person on the next date. Notice shall be served through the Special Commissioner of Police (Crime), who shall also file a report in this regard," ASJ Rawat ordered on December 2, 2023.
During the hearing, advocate Chanya Jaitley, who appeared on behalf of SPP Amit Prasad, said the former couldn't appear for the hearing because of a 'personal difficulty'.
She further submitted that Link SPP Madhukar Pandey will appear but a pass-over may be given.
At this point, the court took a serious view of the matter, stating, "It has been observed by the Court that in riots, regularly proxy counsel for the Special Public Prosecutor is seeking multiple passes over during the day, as they are already engaged in other courts."
The court stated that this has been a trend almost regularly over the last few days, adding that even witnesses in rioting matters have been discharged unexamined due to the absence of a learned SPP.
"This tendency to seek a Passover/date while always stating pre-occupation in other cases in other courts regularly leads to derailment of cases in this court," it ruled.
The matter was listed on December 9 for clarification by the SPP. (ANI)
Get the App
