Delhi Police Challenges NSUI Leader's Plea Over Protest Assaults
Delhi Police questions the maintainability of an NSUI leader's plea seeking a probe into alleged assaults during protests against the Election Commission.
The Delhi Police has raised serious questions regarding the legal validity of a petition filed by a National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) office-bearer. The plea, which was brought before the Delhi High Court, seeks an independent investigation into alleged assaults on protesters and members of the public during demonstrations held in the capital on October 10.
The protests were directed against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and the petitioner is seeking accountability for what they claim were attacks by unidentified individuals during the event.
Legal Hurdles and Procedural Violations
During the proceedings before a division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Nitin Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma, the Delhi Police, represented by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma, argued that the petition fails to meet the necessary legal standards. Specifically, the ASG contended that the petitioner has bypassed the Delhi High Court Public Interest Litigation (PIL) Rules, 2010.
The police highlighted two specific violations:
- Rule 9(f): Which requires petitioners to disclose the nature of the functions of any organization they are associated with.
- Rule 9(g): Which mandates transparency regarding organizational affiliations in such pleas.
The ASG pointed out that while the petitioner is an office-bearer of the NSUI—the student wing of the Congress party—this crucial affiliation was not disclosed in the petition filed with the court.
Personal Capacity vs. Organizational Affiliation
In response to these objections, the counsel for the petitioner argued that the plea was not filed as a representative of the NSUI, but rather in a personal capacity. They maintained that the request for relief is limited to the specific allegations regarding the assaults on protesters and the public.
However, the Delhi Police countered this argument, asserting that a petitioner cannot evade the requirement to disclose organizational ties simply by claiming to act in a personal capacity. The prosecution maintains that the underlying context of the individual's role is vital to the court's assessment of the petition's maintainability.
Next Steps in the Court Case
The High Court bench has formally recorded the Delhi Police's objections regarding the petition's maintainability and noted the failure to comply with the established PIL Rules.
The court has granted the Additional Solicitor General three weeks to file a detailed affidavit outlining preliminary objections and any other legal issues related to the case. The matter is scheduled to be heard again on October 16.