HC fumes over tussle between Centre, Delhi govt on representation of police in violence cases
Jul 01, 2020
New Delhi [India], July 1 : The Delhi High Court on Wednesday expressed unhappiness over the tussle between Centre and Delhi government over the representation of Delhi Police in cases related to the violence in the northeast district of the national capital.
A bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait asked the advocate Amit Mahajan, counsel for the Delhi Police, to show that Lieutenant Governor had appointed him as counsel to file a petition before the court.
Mahajan had moved a plea before the high court seeking cancellation of bail granted to the owner of Rajdhani Public School, who is an accused in the northeast Delhi violence case.
The high court clarified that if the petitioner failed to bring the approval letter from the LG, the interim order, staying the bail order of the Rajdhani Public School owner, passed by this court will be vacated.
The matter was listed for further hearing tomorrow after the counsel sought time to file the appropriate letter of authorisation.
The development comes on the petition, filed through advocates Amit Mahajan and Rajat Nair, on behalf of Delhi Police seeking to cancel the bail granted to Faisal Farooq, owner of Rajdhani School in a Delhi violence case.
Delhi Police has sought to set aside the order and consequential bail granted to the accused Farooq vide order dated June 20 passed by additional sessions judge Vinod Yadav.
The high court had earlier put an interim stay on his release on bail and made it clear that, if he is still in custody then he shall not be released till further order.
The police, in its plea, had submitted that while granting bail to the accused the trial court judge made a patent and manifest error of law as it failed to consider the most important factor, as held by the Supreme Court relevant for the purpose of grant of bail, the reasonable ground to believe that the accused has committed the offence and the nature and gravity of the charge.
The police also said that the trial court also failed to appreciate that the accused Farooq was charged with criminal conspiracy.
