Premium
This is an archive article published on November 9, 2022

Delhi court upholds charges against AAP MLA Parmila Tokas for violating Covid-19 protocols

Judge Goel also held that the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) had correctly held that “there remains no scope of doubt that neither on facts nor on legal/ technical grounds can accused persons be discharged from the present case.”

The observations were made by a single judge bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh. (Express Archive)The observations were made by a single judge bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh. (Express Archive)

A special MP/MLA court in Delhi has upheld a trial court order which framed charges against AAP legislator Parmila Tokas for allegedly violating Covid-19 protocols during a sit-in protest at the Civic Centre in 2020.

Additional Sessions Judge Geetanjali Goel held on November 7 that from the facts and circumstances of the case, prima facie the offences under Sections 188 (Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant), 269 (Negligent act likely to spread infection of disease danger­ous to life), 270 (Malignant act likely to spread infection of disease danger­ous to life) of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 (Common Intention) of the IPC are made out against the petitioners.

Judge Goel also held that the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM)had correctly held that “there remains no scope of doubt that neither on facts nor on legal/ technical grounds can accused persons be discharged from the present case.”

Story continues below this ad

The prosecution has said on September 7, 2020, the petitioners along with others started a dharna at the Civic Centre without seeking permission from senior officers. Despite warnings from senior officers to maintain social distancing, the protesters ignored them and continued to hold the protest, the prosecution submitted.

“Though some people had left the spot after the announcement others stood there without maintaining social distance and despite being told not to gather and to maintain social distancing and to wear face masks, they continued to hold dharna and did not maintain social distance,” the prosecutor told the court.

The counsel for the petitioners argued they were “nowhere present at the spot and if they were not present they could not have disobeyed the order and even the videos and photographs did not show their presence at the spot.”

“Petitioners were not present at the alleged dharna and they had no concern with the alleged dharna and if that were so they could not have breached any order nor spread the corona infection and they had been implicated in the present case by the police officials on the recommendation of the opposite party,” said their counsel.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement