A plea seeking cancellation of the bail granted to JNUSU president Kanhaiya kumar was Wednesday transferred for hearing before a different bench of the Delhi High Court after the counsel for the petitioner objected to a “warning” by the bench to his client — that he would have to bear costs if the matter was dismissed.
- Sexual harassment case: Delhi HC tells Atul Kumar Johri not to be part of JNU panels till inquiry is done
- Can’t comment without verifying whether Kanhaiya violated bail conditions: Delhi Police tells HC
- Delhi HC to hear petitions seeking cancellation of Kanhaiya’s bail on March 23
- JNU row: Delhi HC dismisses plea for action against Kanhaiya Kumar
- JNU row: Kanhaiya Kumar gets bail and a lesson on thoughts that ‘infect… (like) gangrene’
- JNU row: Delhi HC to resume hearing on Kanhaiya Kumar’s bail plea on Monday
The controversy arose as Justice Pratibha Rani, who had granted interim bail to Kumar, asked the counsel whether the petitioner was personally present in the courtroom, and then warned him that he should be ready to bear costs if the petition were to be dismissed.
At this comment, advocate R P Luthra, appearing for petitioner Prashant Kumar Umrao, raised an objection. He argued that the court cannot “intimidate” the petitioner as he had the “right to argue the plea” and “this is our right and it cannot be taken away”.
“If you want to conduct the proceedings like this then you can transfer it to some other court. You cannot say that you will dismiss the plea with cost before hearing it. You can transfer the matter to the Chief Justice,” said Luthra.
The matter is set to be heard before the bench of Justice Suresh Kait Thursday.
Two more pleas on similar grounds were also listed for hearing before Justice Pratibha Rani Wednesday, which will be taken up Thursday along with Umaro’s plea.