JNU row: SC to confine hearing to Patiala House court violence

“There are allegations and counter-allegations. We will examine the issue. We are not concerned with other incidents. We are only concerned with what happened on February 15 and 17,” said a bench of Justice J Chelameswar and Justice Abhay M Sapre.

[related-post]

The response of the court came as reports filed by the Delhi Police and the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court differed with the lawyers’ panel on whether Kanhaiya was assaulted inside the courtroom on February 17. While the lawyers’ panel said he was attacked inside the courtroom, the police and High Court Registrar suggested he was not assaulted.

The counsel for the lawyers’ body also referred to the cultural programme at JNU. He alleged that anti-national slogans were raised and the execution of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru was termed a “judicial killing”. Clarifying that it will not broaden the scope of the hearing, the court said, “It is not the subject matter of the case here.”

The bench also perused the report filed by the Bar Council of India (BCI). The council asked the court as to whether f it should proceed with the proposed inquiry against lawyers who had allegedly participated in the violent incidents in Patiala House on February 15 and on February 17 when Kanhaiya was being produced in connection with the sedition case.

The BCI said it has decided to set up a three-member panel which would also have a former judge of the high court and senior advocate M N Krishnamani. To this, the bench said, “Let all the concerned receive reports. Today we are not saying anything on it.”

Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar and Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre and Delhi Police, asked the court that contents of the reports should not be made public for the time being as it may influence the hearing of the bail application of the accused. The bail plea will come up before the Delhi High Court Tuesday.

But the bench said there were conflicting views in the reports and that the parties should examine all the reports before March 10, the next date of hearing. Adjourning the matter, it said there is no “pressing urgency” to hear the petition filed by JNU alumnus A N Jayaprakash, who has sought court order to ensure free and fair access to justice by Kanhaiya.

On February 19, the bench had transferred Kanhaiya’s bail plea to Delhi High Court and declined to entertain the plea.