A Delhi High Court division bench Monday recused itself from hearing the habeas corpus plea of Gulfisha Fatima, one of the accused in the case of alleged “larger conspiracy” of Northeast Delhi riots, after noting that her counsel Mehmood Pracha was taking recourse to “heckling” during the proceedings. The division bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani further said that Pracha was seeking to place on record facts which are not pleaded in the habeas corpus petition. “In view of the foregoing, we are left with no option but to list this matter before another bench,” said the court, while adjourning the case for further proceedings on Friday. The court, earlier during the hearing, also stated that it refuses to be addressed by a person who does not know even the basics of law. “You are not addressing a rally. You are addressing a court,” said the bench. Fatima was arrested in the case on April 9 and is currently under judicial custody. She, through her counsel, has claimed that her detention in judicial custody is “illegal and invalid” and questioned the validity of the order passed last year by a lower court extending her judicial remand. The court on Monday questioned the maintainability of the habeas corpus plea and observed that Fatima’s brother Aqil Hussain had in 2020 raised a similar plea which was dismissed by another division bench. An SLP against the division bench order was withdrawn later. “You cannot keep filing a habeas corpus every time,” the court said adding that the remand order can be challenged in a properly instituted proceeding. During the hearing, Pracha also submitted that there was no remand order. Seeking a clarification, the court asked when the remand order was passed. Pracha responded, “I don’t know, nobody told me.” However, the court asked him whether it was in the pleadings for which Pracha submitted that his statement can be recorded by the court. When a visibly exasperated court asked, “What is happening here?” Pracha further submitted, “Habeas corpus, milord.” Later responding to The Indian Express, Parcha said, "I respectfully say that this order is patently wrong and factually incorrect. I had only requested for recording my submission to the effect that there is no remand order whatsoever as of today".
