CAA protests: Delhi HC issues notice to Centre, Delhi govt, police; no protection to students

The Delhi High Court Thursday asked the Centre, the AAP government and the police to respond to several PILs seeking setting up of a judicial commission to look into the violence at Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) University protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). Declining to pass any interim direction, including for protection of students from coercive action, a bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice C Hari Shankar listed the matter for hearing on February 4.

As the bench declined to pass any interim orders and rose from the dais, some of the lawyers appearing in the PILs shouted derogatory words against the judges and it was echoed by other advocates in court. The court was hearing six petitions, moved by lawyers, students of JMI, residents of Okhla where the university is located and the Imam of Jama Masjid mosque opposite Parliament House, also sought medical treatment and compensation for the students.

Besides, they sought action, including registration of FIRs, against the erring police officers. Senior advocate Vinay Kumar Garg, appearing in the petition filed by advocate Rizwan, told the court that according to medical reports of the injured students treated at AIIMS, one of them almost lost his life and another has lost his vision.

Garg said there ought to be an independent inquiry into the incident, in which over 50 students were injured and detained by police, as the agency "cannot be trusted to properly investigate" the conduct of its own officers. He alleged that treatment provided to the injured students was "inadequate", FIRs have been lodged against them and they were being hounded like criminals.

Advocate Md Umar Khan, appearing in the plea moved by Manoj Dhiryan, argued that the police was not called by the Vice Chancellor or Chief Proctor of the varsity and it had "barged" into the university "uninvited" with the "intention to quell the right to protest" of the students. Similar sentiments were expressed by senior advocates Sanjay Hegde, Indira Jaising, Colin Gonsalves who appeared for the other petitioners, except the one filed by the Iman of Jama Masjid mosque opposite Parliament House here.

Advocate Mehmood Prachha, who moved the plea on behalf of the Imam and two residents of Okhla, said their plea was not heard by the bench and therefore, he will mention it in court on Friday. Hegde, appearing for lawyer Anshu Kapoor, said the police entered the mosque, library, boys and girls hostels and toilets and beat up the students there and also used tear gas on them.

He said beating up students or using weaponry ought to have been the last resort and first a warning should have been given to them desist from the protest. Jaising, who appeared in the plea moved by eight JMI students, told the court that lawful, legitimate and peaceful protests should not be quelled and certainly not in such a "brutal manner".

She said the force used by the police was "disproportionate", even if it was required, and "brutal" and expressed concern over the "unregulated and unwarranted arrest and detention of students". "Is this law and order," she asked and further said that none of the injuries of the students were treated as a medico-legal case by the hospitals where they were treated and alleged that this was done to prevent any record from being created.

Gonsalves, appearing in the petition filed by lawyer Nabila Hasan and two JMI students, alleged that the students were attacked to stop protests against the CAA. He said the photographs and video recordings of the violence inside the campus indicates the "brutality" of the force used by the police, as one of its senior officers was seen "stomping" on the head of a student lying on the ground.

He also said there were rumours that buses were burnt by the police to get a legitimate excuse to enter the campus and beat up the students and there was video footage showing officers pouring some liquid on one of the buses and also damaging bikes parked nearby. He said he wanted directions to the police to lodge an FIR in connection with the damage to the buses and bikes.

He also said that names of the detained students be disclosed so that parents know where their wards are. He also claimed that despite the Solicitor General telling the Supreme Court that treatment of all injured would be free of cost, those who suffered serious injuries have been asked to pay for the treatment.

He further urged the bench to direct preservation of the CCTV footage as it will show who is right and wrong. After hearing arguments of the petitioners, when the court issued notice to the authorities and did not pass any interim direction, Jaising asked the bench to state in writing that it was denying interim protection from arrest to the students.

As the judges left the dais without responding to her request, several lawyers appearing for the petitioners shouted "shame-shame" at the bench and it was taken up by several other advocates who were watching the matter.