- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
A Delhi Court yesterday dismissed an early hearing application in a plea seeking registration of FIR in connection with the January 5 mob attack on the teachers, students and staff of the Jawaharlal Nehru University in the Univeristy campus.
The order was passed by Duty Metropolitan Magistrate Vasundhara Chhaunkar.
Earlier this year, the application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 for registration of FIR in connection with the attack was filed by JNU Professor Sucharita Sen, (Applicant) who suffered injuries during the violence.
On January 16, the Metropolitan Magistrate at Patiala House Complex directed the SHO concerned to file a status report in response to the plea.
The matter, however, could not be taken up on the next scheduled date due to the en bloc adjournment of pending cases on account of COVID-19 outbreak.
In light of repeated adjournments due to limited functioning of courts, the Applicant moved an early hearing application.
While agreeing to hear the plea, Duty Metropolitan Magistrate concerned sought a status report from Crime Branch.
The Court was subsequently informed that the Crime Branch of Delhi Police was already conducting investigation in connection with the attack.
In its status report filed before Court, Crime Branch stated that the probe by a special investigative team was in progress and all efforts were being made to identify all the attackers/assailants and to conclude investigation in a time-bound manner.
Crime Branch informed that the January 3 and January 4 incidents of ruckus/destruction of property inside the main JNU server room and the January 5 attack by 40-50 masked students were being investigated.
As far as the complaint by the Applicant was concerned, Crime Branch said that her statement under Section 161 CrPC had been recorded and her MLC from AIIMS was also on record.
in view of the submissions made by Crime Branch and COVID-19, the Court concluded that advancing the date of hearing in the Section 156(3) application was not plausible.
The application for early hearing was accordingly dismissed.
The Applicant was represented through Advocate Adit S Pujari.
Read the status report: