|
Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) activists Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka on Wednesday withdrew their petition before the Delhi High Court challenging a Special Executive Magistrates (SEM) order extending their judicial custody till October 21.
Justice Subramonium Prasad permitted the withdrawal after suggesting that the petitioners await the outcome of proceedings before the SEM court, which was scheduled to reconsider the sureties furnished by them at 2 pm on Wednesday. The High Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. During the hearing, advocate Abhik Chimni, appearing for Das and Ranka, argued that the October 19 order extending their custody was legally unsustainable. He contended that the SEM lacked jurisdiction to extend their custody and alleged that preventive proceedings were being used arbitrarily. Chimni also questioned the rejection of the sureties, arguing that two additional sureties were available but were not called upon for consideration. He pointed out that the SEMs order referred to discrepancies in photographs and difficulties in verifying details relating to one of the petitioners. The court, however, questioned why the petitioners had approached it under Article 226 of the Constitution when an alternative legal remedy was available. It observed that an appellate or revisional court could examine the facts and the merits of the order, while writ proceedings primarily examine the decision-making process. The bench also asked the petitioners to consider waiting for the outcome of the proceedings before the SEM court before pursuing further legal remedies. Chimni expressed apprehension that the sureties could again be rejected on fresh grounds, forcing the petitioners to approach the High Court once more. He argued that the petitioners had already spent several days in custody while attempting to furnish sureties. The court also referred to the petitioners earlier bond and the circumstances surrounding their return to Jantar Mantar after the site was denotified as a designated protest venue. It observed that the alleged breach of the bond and the possibility of further disturbance were relevant considerations in the preventive proceedings. The petitioners had moved the High Court challenging the SEMs October 19 order extending their custody till October 21. They sought quashing of the order and their release, contending that the extension of custody and rejection of sureties were unlawful. Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma and counsel Ashish Dixit appeared for the authorities. (ANI)
|
