AI Summit protest: Youth Congress chief gets 4-day police custody

A Delhi court granted 4-day police custody to Youth Congress President Udai Bhanu Chib in the AI Summit protest case. The court noted physical absence doesn't negate criminal liability, as he allegedly planned and monitored the protest remotely.

Delhi's Patiala House Court on Tuesday granted four days of police custody of Indian Youth Congress President Udai Bhanu Chib in the AI Summit protest case.

Court's Stance on Custody and Liability

The court said that the absence of a person does not exonerate him from criminal liability, while the counsel for accsued had argued that he was not physically present at the spot. "The law recognises that conspiracy and abetment can be hatched and executed from a distance and that the absence of physical presence does not, by itself, exonerate a person from criminal liability," the court said.

At the same time, the court called 7 days remand as prolonged custody. It also said that phrases like Sovereignty of State, National Security itself don't justify the custody of the accused. "It is well-settled that mere incantation of phrases such as 'sovereignty of the State' or 'national security' cannot, by themselves, justify prolonged police custody," Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Ravi said while granting 4 days' custody of Uday Bhanu Chib.

The court pointed out that the investigating agency must still demonstrate a "rational nexus" between the custodial interrogation sought and specific investigative requirements.

Allegations of Remote Conspiracy

The court observed that in the disclosure statement of co-accused Shree Krishan Hari and in the remand application, it is alleged that the present accused Uday Bhanu Chib had conceptualised the protest, gave directions to the other accused persons for execution of the plan and was monitoring the same remotely.

It is further alleged that co-accused Shree Krishan Hari used to keep the present accused informed, including when he entered the venue Bharat Mandapam and that protest T-shirts with slogans 'PM COMPROMISED' or similiar ere arranged and distributed as part of the plan, police stated.

The court noted that in the present case, it is not in dispute that the incident involved an organised protest at an international forum and that 4 co accused have already been remanded to police custody in the same FIR.

The court also pointed out that the case diary reflects that the present accused has been named as the person who, while not physically present at the spot, allegedly conceived and directed the protest and maintained contact with the co-accused during the execution of the plan.

Prosecution's Case for Remand

Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Atul Shrivastav submitted that, in view of the nature of Slogans allegedly raised, the time and place of incident and the international forum where the same occurred, the alleged acts have the effect of threatening the sovereignty of the State and, therefore, Section 197(1)(d) (Criminalizes the dissemination of false information endangering India's sovereignty, unity or security) BNS is attracted.

It was also argued that the conduct of the unlawful assembly and the violence that ensued satisfied the ingredients of the offence of rioting. On these premises, a prayer was made for the grant of 7 days' police remand.

Investigative Requirements

The court noted that the Investigation Officer (IO) spelt out several grounds in the remand application, including the need to ascertain the role and whereabouts of the absconding co-accused, analyse digital evidence, trace the source of funding and printing of T-shirts, and recover remaining T-shirts and other material. These are legitimate investigative purposes.

Defense Opposes Custody Plea

While opposing the custody remand, the counsel for accsued said that he has no direct role in the incident. It was also argued that he was not present at the spot, and he did not participate in the protest. He had no knowledge of T Shirt allegedly worn by some ofthe co-accused. It was also argued that the allegations regarding the recovery of T Shirt is frivolous and trivial and cannot justify the police custody.

Court's Final Justification for Remand

The court said that the material placed so far, including the disclosure of the o-accused and the recitals in the arrest memo and grounds of arrest, prima facie indicate that the role attributed to the present accused is that of a person who operated from behind the scenes by giving directions and monitoring the protest. "At the stage of remand, such material cannot be discarded merely on the ground that the accused was not physically present at the place of occurrence," the court said.

While granting 4 days custody the court said, "Considering that the accused has been arrested only recently; that he is alleged to have played a key role in planning and directing the incident from behind the scenes; that digital and financial trails are yet to be fully explored; and that at least one conspirators is stated to be absconding whose whereabouts are allegedly within the knowledge of the present accused, some limited period of police custody would be justified." (ANI)

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)