A request to form a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to look into alleged police atrocities committed at Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) University in December 2019 in response to student protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act was opposed by Delhi Police on Tuesday, December 13 in the High Court.
In response to an "amendment application" filed in a pending PIL regarding the violence at the varsity, the police claimed that a "stranger" cannot request a judicial inquiry or an investigation by any third-party agency. The amendment application also asked for the transfer of FIRs filed against students to an independent agency, as reported by PTI.
According to the police, the request was, “nothing but a disguised attempt by a third party interloper to interfere in criminal matters in the garb of PIL” and the petitioner of a PIL cannot be permitted to choose the members of the SIT for investigating and prosecuting any alleged offence. The reply said, “The petitioners, who are third-party strangers under the garb of PIL, cannot seek either a judicial inquiry or investigation by any third-party agency for ventilating grievances of persons who are not before the Hon'ble Court. It is submitted that an amendment which changes the nature of the plaint/petition, in law, cannot be permitted,” stated a PTI report.
The reply also added, “It is submitted that the petitioners, who claim to be students of Jamia, do not have locus to seek registration of FIR/judicial inquiry or investigation by a third party agency on behalf of a third person stranger. It is well settled that it is impermissible in law to seek the intervention of the Hon'ble Courts in criminal matters in the garb of PIL.”
Several petitions regarding the incident are pending before the high court, asking for instructions on setting up a Special Investigation Team, a Commission of Inquiry (CoI), or a fact-finding committee, to provide medical care, compensation, and temporary protection from arrest for the students, as well as how to file formal FIRs against the responsible police officers. The petitioners include lawyers, JMI students, Okhla neighbours (where the university is located in south Delhi), and the Imam of Jama Masjid Mosque, which is located opposite Parliament House.
Last month, a division bench presided over by Justice Siddharth Mridul gave the Delhi Police one last chance to respond to an "amendment application" to add a few further requests to a still-pending petition from Nabila and others.
On Tuesday, December 13, the court set a new hearing date of January 12 for the case. In response, the police claimed that under the appearance of student agitation. As a result, the Crime Branch of the Delhi Police has conducted a thorough investigation of several FIRs.
According to the electronic evidence gathered and the statements that were recorded, what actually occurred during the student unrest appears to have been a well-organized and orchestrated attempt by some individuals with local support (who were not students) to intentionally commit violence in the area. "As such, the prime contention of the petitioners that it was a mere student protest; and that the demonstration was peaceful is an utter falsehood,” the response said.
According to the police, it was unlawful for the petitioner to broaden the scope of the ongoing petition by incorporating an unjustifiable and unmaintainable prayer and by requesting unnecessary interference in the criminal processes, which have already begun and are in the advanced stages. The investigating agency stated the claimed victims must seek legal redress before a competent court of law, and none of the allegedly injured students has done so as of yet.
The petitioner's request for names of people to be nominated to the SIT, it continued, was unworkable and “smacks of malice and seeks to ostensibly achieve something clandestinely behind the facade of a public interest litigation.” There are enough safeguards provided under law to protect the interest of any individual either claiming to be an aggrieved victim, claiming to be innocent or demonstrating that the person has been falsely implicated in an offence. "It is thus for the individual concerned, against whom any criminal proceeding is lodged to work out his remedy, as provided under CrPC (Criminal Procedure Code),” the reply said as reported by PTI.
They said a move such as this would also "reassure the public" and would restore the people's faith in the system. Previously, the police opposed the petitions stating the reliefs the petitioners were seeking cannot be granted as the charge sheets have been filed in connection with the violence and whatever relief they want before the subordinate court concerned.
In response to the claim that officers had illegally entered the university, the police's attorney had stated that this was not a problem anywhere else in the world. He had stated that compensation for pupils who suffered serious injuries as a result of the violence could only be given if the breach had been admitted and that this was currently being done in the instance at hand.
