NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Saturday granted bail to a man who allegedly assaulted a policeman on duty with a spear during the violence which erupted at the Red Fort on Republic Day this year.
On January 26, protesting farmers had clashed with police during the tractor rally against the three farm laws and stormed into the Red Fort, hoisting religious flags on its domes and injuring scores of policemen.
Granting him relief, Additional Sessions Judge Kamini Lau said neither the photographs and videos relied upon by the prosecution are very clear nor accused Khempreet Singh can be seen attacking anyone in them.
“The charge sheet against the accused has already been filed and he is no longer required for investigation,” the judge said, adding that an accused is “deemed innocent till proved guilty”.
She further said that most of these offences in the case are bailable in nature and 14 accused out of the 18 arrested, including main conspirators Deep Sandhu and Iqbal Singh, are already out on bail.
Th judge also relied upon the observations in the bail order passed by the Delhi High Court in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) case filed against three student activists — Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita, and Asif Iqbal Tanha.
“The Delhi High Court observed that at a time when the society is polarised and fractured across various lines and ideology reached vanishing point, the court will do all within their mandate to prevent the misuse of the law and alleviate the anxiety which has come to surround these individuals,” ASJ Lau noted.
The Hon’ble Delhi Court observed that the courts do not function in a vacuum and judges surely have a view on what is happening around them and that the India democracy is undergoing metamorphosis, she added.
According to the police, accused Khempreet Singh entered the Red Fort through Lahore Gate with an unruly mob, waived the spear from the ramparts, and severely attacked and assaulted the on-duty policeman.
Denying this claim, advocates Jaspreet Singh Rai and Jagdeep Singh Dhillon, representing the accused, told the court that there is not even an iota of evidence against him, and is being falsely implicated in the case.