Supreme Court asks ex-Delhi mayor Farhad Suri to approach Delhi Police over raids at his residence by UP Police

Suri moved the Court alleging that a large team of Ghaziabad Police raided his Delhi residence at midnight while looking for journalist Abhishek Upadhyay, who had reported about the Ram Mandir donation theft.
Delhi Police
Delhi Police
Published on
3 min read

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked former Delhi Mayor Farhad Suri to approach the Delhi Police for action in relation to raids conducted at his residence by the Uttar Pradesh police..

Suri had moved the Court alleging that a large team of Ghaziabad Police raided his Delhi residence at midnight while looking for journalist Abhishek Upadhyay, who had reported about the Ram Mandir donation theft.

Suri sought directions to the police to register a first information report (FIR) as well as guidelines to governing inter-State police operations, particularly searches of residential premises.

However, a bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana declined to pass any omnibus directions.

Instead, it granted Suri the liberty to approach the concerned police station with his complaint.

"If you want registration of an FIR against the police officers, that can very well be addressed. Why should we frame guidelines? In your case, you are wanting an FIR to be registered. It is not that we are saying you are not entitled to. You have a right to do that. Seek the specific mechanism, whatever is provided. Approach that, and in case the needful is not done, then of course you are entitled to take further remedies," the Court remarked.

Suri's counsel pointed out that the raid happened without following the procedure laid down by the law.

"Somebody comes even without a warrant, without informing the local police station, with a large contingent of police and raids the premises. They now say that they approached the local police station and made an entry. But, my Lords, page 33 shows that the entry was made at 1:11 at night, after the raid," Suri's lawyer said.

"You want the Delhi Police to act," the Bench asked.

"Yes, My Lords," the counsel replied.

The Court then granted liberty to Suri to approach the concerned police station.

"Petitioner is at liberty to approach the jurisdictional police station under Section 175(3). We have no reason to doubt that the competent authority will act in accordance with law," the Court said in its order.

CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Justice V Mohana
CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Justice V Mohana

Suri had alleged that a police team led by Ghaziabad Assistant Commissioner of Police Suryabali Maurya arrived at his Nizamuddin East residence in the intervening night of August 22 and 23 at around 12:45 AM.

In his plea, Suri had sought directions from the Supreme Court for the registration of an FIR against the police officials who conducted the raid, and an independent investigation into the incident.

According to the plea, the police initially told Suri that they were looking for an accused in a double murder case registered at Indirapuram who they believed was hiding in his house.

When Suri asked to see a search warrant, the police could not produce one or offer any explanation for the search, the plea states.

As per his petition, Suri later learnt the police team had in fact come pursuant to a first information report (FIR) registered at Indirapuram Police Station - the same FIR that names journalist Abhishek Upadhyay in a road rage case, and not any double murder case as he had originally been told.

According to his plea, he had submitted complaints before the Delhi Police to register an FIR and conduct investigation into the incident. He had also sought identification of the police personnel and other persons involved in the raid, the preservation of CCTV footage, tracing of call-detail records and identification of the vehicles used by the police team.

However, no FIR was registered on his complaint. Instead, the complaint was simply forwarded between senior police officers.

Suri, therefore, approached the Supreme Court seeking an independent investigation into the alleged raid, including the examination of CCTV footage, call-detail records, wireless communications, vehicle records and other electronic evidence.

Suri had also sought directions to identify the approximately 50 persons whom he alleged were involved in or had facilitated the raid operation.

The petition also sought guidelines governing inter-State police operations, particularly searches of residential premises.

[Read Live Coverage]

Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com