Law Intern Arrested In Indore Seeks Supreme Court Intervention; Says Local Bar Refused Legal Aid Amid 'Communally Hostile Environment'
The Supreme Court, on Friday, issued notice in a plea filed by a lawyer and a young law intern alleging that they have fallen victim to communal frenzy. Both the women belonging to a minority community have approached the Apex Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India asserting their right to life and liberty. The writ petition alleges that the petitioners - lawyer Noorjahan and...
The Supreme Court, on Friday, issued notice in a plea filed by a lawyer and a young law intern alleging that they have fallen victim to communal frenzy. Both the women belonging to a minority community have approached the Apex Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India asserting their right to life and liberty.
The writ petition alleges that the petitioners - lawyer Noorjahan and law student Sonu Mansoori- are implicated in false, baseless, politically motivated and communally charged cases at the behest of the local organisations having affiliations to the current political dispensation in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
The petition alleges that on 28.01.2023, supporters of Bajrang Dal along with a group of lawyers associated with the Adhivakta Sangh, manhandled the law intern inside the courtroom. They accused the intern of secretly recording the bail proceedings of a Bajrang Dal leader,s who was accused of carrying out acts of vandalism in protest of the movie ‘Pathan’
As per the petition, the law intern was forcibly frisked and the miscreants snatched away a large sum of money and a phone that was in her possession. The petition submits that the local police came to the spot, but instead of taking action against the malefactors took the intern to the police station and lodged FIR against her on the basis of complaint that she was working for banned organisations like the PFI and the Peace Party. Subsequently, she was arrested. On 29.01.2023, when produced before the Judicial Magistrate, remand was granted till 01.02.2023. No lawyer dared to appear on behalf of the intern amidst the "communally hostile environment" created by the miscreants.
The petition submits that, as the local lawyers refused to defend her, four lawyers had to go from Delhi to file the bail application. The four Counsels sought police protection, but were denied the same. They were even prevented from attending the court hearing. The police remand was extended till 04.02.2023. When the Advocates approached the local Bar Association to inform the members about the treatment meted out to them, the members expressed their helplessness. Later, they were threatened by an unknown person and were asked to leave Indore immediately. The lawyers went to the local police station, but were not attended to by the officers. Since the police did not take any action, the lawyers were constrained to return to Delhi. Due to lack of legal representation, the intern has now been sent to judicial custody.
The petition seeks directions from the Apex Court for an independent inquiry into the incident that took place in the Indore District Courts premises. It is beseeched that a High Court Judge, either sitting or retired be entrusted with the investigation. The petition also seeks directions to the State Government to ensure safety of the petitioners. It appears that FIR has also been registered against the lawyer petitioner. Thus, the Court is implored to stay her arrest in that regard. The petition further seeks that the law intern, who has been in custody for almost two months be enlarged on bail; the FIR against her be quashed; alternatively, investigation be transferred to an independent agency, preferably one outside Madhya Pradesh.
Initially, the Bench comprising Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Bela M. Trivedi was not inclined to issue notice in the matter and asked the petitioners to approach the High Court. Upon being informed that the High Court is in the same vicinity as the District Court wherein the incident had taken place, the Bench issued notice and listed the matter for hearing on 20.03.2022. Justice Rastogi asked Senior Advocate, Mr. Dushyant Dave, appearing on behalf of the petitioners to share a copy of the petition with the Standing Counsel for the State of Madhya Pradesh today itself.
When the matter came up for hearing, Justice Rastogi asked, “Why are you coming to this Court? Go to the High Court.”
Mr. Dave responded, “Because nobody can defend her. The lawyers who went from Delhi were chased away. This is an extraordinary case. The Prime Minister had to intervene in this issue. The Prime Minister had to caution everybody that, ‘do not stop movies like this’.”
He added that he has approached the Apex Court under Article 32 of the Constitution asserting the right to liberty of the petitioner, who has been in custody for almost 2 months now.
“It is about the liberty of a citizen taken into custody for 2 months.”
However, Justice Rastogi did not seem to be happy about the routine practice of advocates seeking transfer of cases to Delhi.
“This business of getting every matter transferred to Delhi is not acceptable. S. 439 Cr.P.C. is a concurrent jurisdiction.”
Mr. Dave submitted -
“We are not asking for a transfer. We have moved 32 for your lordship's intervention. There is no reason to arrest this young girl…32 supersedes everything.”
Justice Trivedi opined that the petitioners ought to first exhaust the remedy before the High Court -
“First you have to approach the competent high court, then this court.”
The Judges were apprised that the High Court in Indore is next door to the District Court where the unfortunate incident had taken place. Taking note of the same, the Bench issued notice to the State.
Apart from Mr. Dave, Advocate, Mr. Anil Kumar Bakshi and Advocate, Mr. Rajesh Tyagi represented the petitioners.
[Case Title: Noorjahan @Noori And Anr v. State of Madhya Pradesh WP(Crl) No. 73/2023]