Delhi High Court Restrains Delhi Police From Issuing Contentious Statement

Must Read

Bombay High Court Pursues Case Alleging Media Trial, Says NBSA Guidelines Must Be Toothed by Centre

Amid the pleas alleging media trials, the Division Bench had been hearing submissions of the News Broadcasters’ Authority (NBA)....

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration,...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of...

Follow us

Pinjra Tod activist Devangana Kalita approached the High Court of Delhi to issue directions to the Delhi Police. The order has come in the form of a criminal writ. It is a request to not leak any claims of pending investigations to the media until the trial of the case begins.

Facts of the Case

The Petitioner, Devangana Kalita is a student in the M. Phil-Ph.D Program at the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). The Petitioner is accused under IPC, Arms Act, and Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. The impugned press note had stated charges against the Petitioner of hatching a conspiracy. This is apropos of the riots in the Jafrabad area of the northeast district of Delhi. The press note also mentions that the Petitioner has a connection to the ‘India Against Hate’ group. Since a WhatsApp message on her phone revealed the conspiracy and the extent of preparation for causing riots in Delhi. 

In the present Petition, Kalita also demands to set aside the allegations put on by the Delhi police in the press note on June 02, 2020. 

Petitioner’s Argument

Adit Pujari appeared for the Petitioner. He argued that the said press note of the Delhi Police is an attempt to prejudice the Petitioner’s right to a fair trial. Hence, it violates Article 21 of the Constitution.

He further said that the circulation of the disputed note and selective leaking of the contents of the charge sheet had caused huge damage. Not only to the Petitioner’s reputation but also her fundamental right to a fair trial. Hence, it has weakened the presumption of her innocence.

Mr. Pujara then relied on a judgment held in Romila Thapar v. Union of India: (2018) 10 SCC 753. In this, the Court has restrained respondents from making such selective leaks until the conclusion of the trial.

Respondent’s Argument

Additional Solicitor General Aman Lekhi appeared for the Delhi Police. He defended the press note by contending that the same got issued in response to a campaign run by the Pinjra Tod group. They were doing a campaign on social media against the investigation by the Delhi Police.

Mr. Lekhi further submitted that it was not the intention of the Delhi Police to run a media trial. And this was evident from the fact that the Delhi Police had issued only one note (and not multiple notes) mentioning the petitioner’s name.

Court’s Observation

  1. The allegations in the press note were ‘faithfully lifted’ from one of the charge sheets filed in a case related to the Delhi riots.
  2. The said press note was not ‘selectively leaked’ to the media. The Public Relations Officer circulated it to around 400 media outlets.

Court’s Order

While evaluating the submissions, the Court relied upon the judgment of Justice D Y Chandrachud in Romila Thapar v. Union of India which stated:

“The use of the electronic media by the investigating arm of the State to influence public opinion during the pendency of an investigation subverts the fairness of the investigation. The police are not adjudicators nor do they pronounce upon guilt.”

Hence, The Single Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru restrained the Delhi Police from issuing such controversial statements.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Bombay High Court Pursues Case Alleging Media Trial, Says NBSA Guidelines Must Be Toothed by Centre

Amid the pleas alleging media trials, the Division Bench had been hearing submissions of the News Broadcasters’ Authority (NBA). It prayed that severe restrictions...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -