Concerning That Law Students Are Fighting In Such A Manner: HC Declines Anticipatory Bail To Delhi University Student Accused Of Assaulting Peers
Sanjana Dadmi
23 July 2024 7:02 AM GMT
While refusing anticipatory bail to a law student involved in a fight against other students, the Delhi High Court expressed its dismay at the incident and remarked “It is quite unfortunate that the complainant as well as the petitioner party who are law students have indulged in the fight. It is a matter of great concern that the students of law are fighting in such a manner.”
The student/petitioner filed the petition under Section 438 read with Section 482 Cr.PC seeking anticipatory bail.
There was a fight between two groups of students at Delhi University. The petitioner along with his group had beaten and injured the complainant and other students.
The student contended that he had beaten the complainant only by using his fists and hand blows and that the injuries suffered were simple. The student also contended that the investigation against him was influenced by a senior judicial officer, who he claimed to be the uncle of the complainant.
Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma expressed disappointment at the incident and raised concerns about law students being involved in such fights.
The Court noted that the FIR indicates that the petitioner was part of the group carrying weapons like hockey, lathi and iron rod, that assaulted the complainant and other people.
It stated that the petitioner tried to make the issue trivial by stating that it is common for groups of students to clash in a university. Noting that such incidents require thorough examination and investigation, it stated “This court takes such incidents very seriously and is aghast to note that the law students who will in the coming years be occupying the responsible position of the lawyers or the law officers are indulging in such altercations.”
The Court also expressed disappointment at the conduct of the petitioner in making allegations against a sitting senior judicial officer. It said that such allegations “...without any basis scandalise the entire system of administration of criminal justice.”
It stated that granting anticipatory bail in such incidents would send a wrong message. Observing that anticipatory bail is granted only when there is a reasonable apprehension of harassment or being arrested in a false case, the Court stated such conditions are not met in the present case.
The Court thus dismissed the anticipatory bail application.
Case title: Priyam Sharma vs. State NCT of Delhi (BAIL APPLN. 2252/2024)
