Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Seeking Release Of Persons "Illegally" Detained During Farmers' Tractor Rally

These persons have been allegedly illegally detained by police since January 26 in connection with the protests on Republic Day, and the petitioner, a law graduate, claimed that no arrest memos also had been issued in respect of the persons' detention. He claimed that he had come to know through news reports and social activists that people had been detained from the Singhu, Ghaziabad and Tikri borders.

Asking the petitioner for verification of the alleged fact that the said persons were missing, the Court asked him to produce affidavits of the families of all such persons who he claimed had been illegally detained by the police.

Chief Justice DN Patel remarked, "It shouldn't happen that today you claim they have been detained, and tomorrow their families present themselves here and claim otherwise."

The court then asked the petitioner to elaborate on the merits of the allegations and details of the FIRs under which such persons had been allegedly detained, upon which it noted that the petitioner's advocate had not given any answer.

"For the question of discharge, the court has to look into the nature of the allegations," the bench stated, and said that it would not only dismiss the petition but also impose heavy costs.

They further stated, "When we asked if any family members have been contacted, we have been told they haven't been contacted. Persons cannot be released without entering into the merits of the FIR or allegations."

The court, however, directed for the investigation in the cases to be conducted in a time bound manner, yet, the petitioner's prayer for a status report by the police on the cases was not commented upon.

Further, when upon the court's direction that persons detained, if any, shall be produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours of their arrest, as per the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, ASG Chetan Sharma prayed that instead of this, it may be directed that the persons be dealt with "in accordance with law", the court agreed.