Timely, lawful measures averted major public order situation in capital: Delhi Police to SC
“These measures were directed towards maintaining peace and tranquillity and preventing any disturbance of public order in the national capital,” said Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar.
He has told the Supreme Court that timely, proportionate and lawful measures taken by the police helped avert a major public order situation during the recent protests.
The police commissioner, who tendered an unconditional and unqualified apology to the apex court in a contempt case, said that preventive measures undertaken on October 10, when the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) gave a protest call, were based on intelligence inputs and an assessment of the prevailing and ever-changing ground situation.
In an affidavit filed in the top court, Kumar referred to the steps taken by the police administration, including regulation of Metro rail services in Delhi.
The efforts made, and the actions taken by the police, deserve to be viewed in the context of the fact that Delhi is the capital of the country and that every national capital carries its own sensitivities, the commissioner said.
“No police administration can permit any breach of public order in the national capital, particularly when a call is given by an organisation with a recent history of mob violence, destruction of public and private property, and incidents resulting in injuries to several individuals and the subsequent events of October 6, 7 and 8,” the affidavit said.
Supreme Court commenced hearing on a batch of pleas linked to the October 10 protests in Delhi, including petitions challenging the alleged detention and 'harassment of peaceful protesters'.
The Centre and other authorities have filed their responses before the Court to the pleas on which the Court had earlier sought responses.
The bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant had earlier noted that there were essentially four sets of matters before it (all directly or indirectly connected with the October 10 protests).
The Court had also sought the personal presence of a senior Delhi Police officer to explain allegations of harassment and manhandling of women journalists during the ongoing protests, after the bench said it was aware of the allegations and had asked police officers present in Court to inquire into the matter.
The hearing comes after the Supreme Court agreed to the Centre’s request for an extension until Thursday to respond to two pleas — one seeking contempt action against authorities for alleged disobedience of the Court’s October 8 order, which had virtually lifted a “complete ban” affecting Delhi Metro and railway services and other civic services during the protests, and a batch of other pleas challenging alleged detentions by the police.
Petitioners to also mention alleged attacks and assaults on children and peaceful protesters by certain goons, and their garlanding by some supporters after they were granted bail just one day after being arrested.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, explains that the apologies tendered before the Court by the authorities are only in keeping with the manner in which contempt proceedings work.
SG objects to media reports with headlines saying authorities have apologised for contempt of court orders. “We are not taking cognisance of unconditional and unqualified apologies. Because of your submission, it will become qualified,” the Court says.
Court: “Apart from the DMRC response, we have not been able to read any other responses (submitted by the authorities).”
No comments:
Post a Comment