Whereas listening to an software by Devangana Kalita, accused within the bigger conspiracy case associated to the 2020 Delhi riots, the Delhi Excessive Courtroom on Monday stated the prosecution ought to “present equity” by declaring that it’s going to protect the case diaries as an alternative of opposing her plea in search of clarification on a excessive courtroom order to protect case data of a probe by the Jafrabad police.
Kalita and fellow scholar activist Natasha Narwal are named as accused in an FIR registered on the Jafrabad police station for being amongst those that organised a protest in opposition to the Citizenship Modification Act and street blockade beneath the Jafrabad metro station on February 22-23, 2020. This was adopted by a pro-CAA rally led by BJP chief Kapil Mishra and his supporters on February 23, and riots broke out within the district a day later.
After Kalita’s alleged tampering and antedating of CrPC part 161 statements, the excessive courtroom in December 2024 directed the trial courtroom to protect the case diaries. In her plea, Kalita sought the setting apart of the order of judicial Justice of the Peace top quality of Shahdara, Karkardooma courtroom, from November 6, 2024, the place the courtroom refused to delve into her allegations of tampering and antedating of statements which have been a part of the case diary and filed with the principle in addition to supplementary chargesheets within the case. Kalita additionally sought the preservation and reconstruction of the case diary.
Kalita is now in search of clarification as as to whether this might imply the preservation of whole case data or solely the case data pertaining to the Jafrabad incident. Advocate Adit Pujari, representing Kalita, argued earlier than Justice Ravinder Dudeja that if the preservation was restricted to the case diary pertaining to Jafrabad, “it will be an train in futility”, whereas arguing that the preservation of data would imply together with your complete case data.
Addressing the prosecution, Justice Ravinder Dudeja, remarked, “…it’s already seen from the data that there’s prima facie antedating…Why do you could have any objection? Present your equity and say you’ll protect your complete data.”
Particular Public Prosecutor Anuj Handa responded, “I’ve by no means objected to preservation of data, what he says is, protect data of all circumstances… For the previous one and a half years, the petitioner has been silent. When (the trial courtroom) directed that both you argue or we’ll cross orders on deserves, they raised this problem..”
In search of a response from the prosecution to Kalita’s software in search of clarification, the courtroom posted the matter for additional consideration on July 7.
