Delhi: Patiala House Court grants bail to nine accused in Parliament Street Police Station protest case

NEW DELHI: Delhi’s Patiala House Court on Friday granted bail to nine accused persons arrested in the Parliament Street Police Station protest case. They are accused of raising slogans and scuffling with the police.

Delhi police had arrested 17 persons from outside of Parliament Street Police Station on Sunday.

Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Sahil Monga granted bail to the nine accused. The court has granted bail to the accused persons, furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20000 each.

Some bail applications are pending for a hearing on Saturday.

Advocate Nizam Pasha, along with Ahmad Ibrahim, Advocate Soujanya Shankaran, and Advocate Rajesh Kaushik, appeared for some of the accused for the bail hearing.

During the bail hearing, Advocate Ahmad Ibrahim, counsel for Gurkirat Kaur, had argued on Thursday that she was not involved in the protest or scuffle. She went to the police station after knowing that her sister, Ravjot Kaur, was detained by the police. She is not seen in the video.

Delhi’s Patiala House Court on Thursday remanded Gurkirat Kaur, Ravjot Kaur, Kranti, and Avinash Satyapati in two days’ police custody.

Alongside, at least 13 accused were also remanded to judicial custody.

While seeking the custody of five accused persons, the police on Thursday submitted that custody is required, as the police have to arrest three accused seen in the video.

Delhi police had also submitted, “There are not only three people…we don’t know how many people are there… There is a Conspiracy, we are investigating.”

The Court questioned the investigation officer, “Why don’t you specify that some of the accused have been arrested in another FIR. What is the scope of your investigation?”

It was stated that the source of funding was to be verified as the accused were travelling, organising conferences, and using expensive mobile phones. It was submitted that custody is required for the recovery of the pepper spray and the identification of the other accused.

The investigation officer also sought judicial custody of the 12 accused persons. It was submitted that their addresses have not been verified.

The counsel for the accused had opposed the custodial remand application. It was submitted that it is an admitted case of a scuffle between students and police at the police station. They also said that in this case, no police custody is required and claimed that there was no use of pepper spray at the protest site.

It was also submitted that the whole area is under CCTV footage surveillance, and the police are seeking remand of the accused persons to identify other responsible persons. It shows that police want to extract a confession statement, but the same is not admissible in law.

The counsel had also argued that the video the police are relying upon is related to the incident of Kartavya Path for which an FIR has already been registered. (ANI)