'Actively Participated In Incendiary Speeches': Delhi Court Denies Bail To Preet Singh In Jantar Mantar Sloganeering Case
A Delhi Court has denied bail to Preet Singh, accused in the alleged inflammatory and anti-Muslim sloganeering at Jantar Mantar, after observing that he is clearly seen actively participating in the incendiary speeches along with other associates.Singh is the President of Save India Foundation and is alleged to be the co-organizer of the event where the inflammatory slogans ...
A Delhi Court has denied bail to Preet Singh, accused in the alleged inflammatory and anti-Muslim sloganeering at Jantar Mantar, after observing that he is clearly seen actively participating in the incendiary speeches along with other associates.
Singh is the President of Save India Foundation and is alleged to be the co-organizer of the event where the inflammatory slogans were shouted. His plea for anticipatory bail was denied by a Metropolitan Magistrate on August 12.
In his order denying regular bail, Additional Sessions Judge Anil Antil observed:
"That prima facie on the basis of the material placed on record and the submissions put forth by the prosecution, it is observed that there has been active participation by the applicant in his individual capacity and also as the main organizer of the event itself which was conducted at Jantar Mantar in spite of the denial of permission by the Delhi Police and total disregard to Covid19 protocol issued by the Govt. of India."
"Given the stature of the applicant, it was expected that he ought to have exercised his authority, in these circumstances, and prevented participants from the erring such inflammatory opinions in the larger interest of the public / Committee welfare. On the other hand, applicant is clearly seen actively participating in the incendiary speeches alongwith his other associates."
Singh has been booked under Sections 188 (Disobedience to public servant's order), 269-270 (Negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life), 153A (Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, etc.), 120B (Criminal conspiracy) and 34 of IPC.
He argued that all the offences alleged against him are bailable in nature except offence punishable under Section 153A IPC, essential ingredients whereof are missing in this case. It was contended that his inalienable right to freedom of speech cannot be curtailed by the arbitrary acts of the executive.
The Court observed that right to assemble and freedom to air one's thoughts are cherished under the Constitution of India, however, they are not absolute and are to be exercised with inherent reasonable restrictions.
"It is apposite to mention that the applicant not only voluntarily organized the event but also actively participated and provided support to the views and contents of inflammatory speeches, which were being made by the participants / accused persons at that time, by acknowledging and endorsing via gestures and clappings intermittently," Court added.
It was submitted by Singh that he was falsely implicated in the matter and that there was no complaint in verbal and writing or PCR call against him or any other person qua the offences alleged in the FIR.
He also submitted that no hatred speech was given by him and that a perusal of the FIR and the interview makes it evident that he had not uttered any words against any religions or any other section of the society.
However, the bail plea was rejected and dismissed by the Court saying,
"The complicity of the applicant in the alleged offences are prima facie evident from the material placed before the court ; and the contentions of the applicant to say that essential ingredients of offence u/s 153-A IPC are not made out qua the present applicant is totally unconvincing."
Earlier, the Court had dismissed the anticipatory bail plea moved on behalf of Bhupender Tomar alias Pinky Chaudhary in the case.
"We are not a Taliban State. Rule of law is sacrosanct governing principle in our plural and multi cultural society," the Court observed while denying the grant of bail to Chaudhary.
The Court had granted bail to former Delhi BJP Spokesperson and Supreme Court lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay, who was arrested and remanded to two days judicial custody in the matter.
Videos of mob at the gathering shouting slogans openly calling for the killing of Muslims had emerged on Sunday. Lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay, who has now been granted bail by the Court, claimed that the slogans were raised after the meeting organized by him was over. He had organized a meeting calling for the repeal of "colonial-era laws".
Case Title: State v. Preet Singh