A court in New Delhi has granted bail to eight more individuals accused in a high-profile case linked to protests near Parliament Street. The decision, delivered on Tuesday, marks a significant development in a matter where students faced charges for allegedly raising pro-Naxalite slogans and obstructing police personnel on duty.
Judge's Observations on Prosecution's Objections
While granting relief, Judge Sahil Monga made a crucial observation regarding the prosecution's case. The judge pointed out that a substantial portion of the objections raised by the investigating officer were not directly connected to the First Information Report (FIR) registered at the Parliament Street Police Station.
Instead, Judge Monga noted these objections pertained mostly to a separate FIR filed at Kartavya Path. These related to allegations concerning protests at India Gate, the recovery of pepper sprays, and the criminal backgrounds of certain individuals, which the court distinguished from the immediate case.
Defence and Prosecution Arguments in Court
During the hearing, the defence counsel presented a strong argument against the nature of the charges. They contended that the FIR contained "omnibus allegations against 18-20 students" without specifying any particular overt act attributable to the individual applicants seeking bail. This lack of specificity formed a core part of their plea for relief.
The prosecution, however, sought to justify police custody for the accused. They argued that the students had allegedly concealed their identities and were in possession of pepper sprays and mobile phones. The prosecution also cited the "antecedents of other co-accused" as grounds for denying bail.
Defence Counters Claims of Aggravated Conduct
The defence team firmly opposed the request for custodial remand. They maintained that the incident, at its core, amounted to an admitted scuffle between students and police at the station. Furthermore, they argued that no chilli spray was actually used at the protest site, a claim that they said undermined the prosecution's allegation of aggravated or violent conduct intended to justify harsh treatment.
The court's decision to grant bail to these eight accused adds another layer to the ongoing legal proceedings. It underscores the judiciary's role in scrutinizing the specifics of charges and ensuring that allegations in one case are not broadly applied to defendants in another without direct evidence linking them to the specific acts.
