The Allahabad High Court on Thursday rejected a petition for cancelling of FIR and criminal proceedings pending against 12 members of the AMU proctorial team, who were booked for abusing a man flying BJP flag on his vehicle in the premises of the University.
A Single Bench of Justice JJ Munir stated that the presence of accused persons at the place where the incident took place is not denied and so, the Trial Court will decide whether any offence was committed there or not.
The Court also denied watching the CCTV footage of the incident as the evaluation of evidence is not under the scope of proceedings under Section 482 of CrPC.
The Court observed, “It is not under the scope of this Court’s jurisdiction to evaluate the importance of these allegations. The informant was allegedly abused and was made to hear words which could result in the creation of hatred, enmity or ill-will between the two classes. The Trial Court should look into this matter, that too when the presence of the applicants, all of them on the scene of incidence is not denied.”
An FIR was lodged against the Applicants by the Civil Lines Police, Aligarh under Section 342 and 504 of IPC for abusing a man flying BJP flag on his vehicle and wrongfully confining him. The trial against all the accused is pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh.
Facts of the Case-
According to the FIR, on 22nd October 2019, Guddu Singh, the driver of BJP MLA Thakur Dalveer Singh, went to AMU to pick up the legislator’s grandson Vijay Kumar Singh (who studies at AMU).
As soon as Guddu Singh entered the premises of the University, the proctorial board of the University forcefully stopped him and asked him to remove BJP’S flag. It is alleged that the members of the proctorial board abused him and said there is no place for BJP in their University.
The Counsel for the Applicant, Swetashwa Agarwal submitted that six members of the proctorial team were highly recognised teachers teaching in the University, and don’t have a criminal background and allegations made against them cannot be believed.
He also submitted that the statement of the MLA’S grandson, Vijay Kumar Singh cannot be used as evidence because it is the statement recorded under Section 161 is hearsay and would be considered as irrelevant.
The Court observed-
“This court can accept the fact submitted by the Applicant’s Counsel that Vijay Kumar Singh’s evidence is hearsay, but informant Guddu Singh’s statement cannot be avoided because he was the one who was stopped and made to remove the flag.”
The Court said that it is not the case about the legality of the flag flying on the vehicle, or how much legal the University rules are, or prohibition of flags of the national political parties flying on vehicles coming in the University campus.
The Court asked the concerned Magistrate to look into the matter.