The Free Press Journal

Sedition case in Delhi court against Manmohan, others

-

A Supreme Court lawyer on Wednesday moved a city court to book former prime minister Manmohan Singh, former vice-president Hamid Ansari and others under Section 120-B, 121-A and 124(A) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for alleged sedition for a conspiracy hatched with Pakistan on December 6 “to destabilis­e the present government and effect the Gujarat poll.”

It has been filed by Ajay Agrawal, who was the BJP candidate from Rae Bareli against Sonia Gandhi in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections and who regularly appears in the debate on the TV channels. He had bagged 1.74 lakh votes as against Sonia’s 5.26 lakh.

Agrawal has deliberate­ly not made Dr Manmohan Singh or anybody else who attended the meeting as respondent­s. He has made on Delhi Police Commission­er and the Hazrat Nizamuddin Police Station House officer as respondent.

Advocate Ajay Agrawal, who lives in the same Jungpura Extension colony of south Delhi in which the alleged conspiracy meeting was held at the residence of former MP Mani Shankar Aiyar, filed the case before the Chief Metropolit­an Magistrate at the Saket Courts after the Nizamuddin Police Station refused to register his FIR (first informatio­n report) against persons who attended the unauthoris­ed and illegal Indo-Pak meeting.

The matter is fixed for hearing on January 4 at 2 PM in the Court of Metropolit­an Magistrate Ms Manika in Room No.512 of the Saket Courts, New Delhi.

It is the same controvers­ial meeting that was used by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in a Gujarat poll rally to accuse Dr Manmohan Singh and others hatching a conspiracy against him with Pakistan.

In his applicatio­ns to court as also to the police station and the National Investigat­ion Agency (NIA), advocate Agrawal said the purpose of the meeting became known “the very next day when its host Mani Shankar Aiyar uttered highly derogatory and abusive language ‘Neech Aadmi” to the elected Indian Prime Minister.”

“This act of inciting hatred towards the elected government and the person doing it and the persons involved in conspiracy should be booked under appropriat­e provisions of law, including Section 120-B, 121-A, 124 (A) of IPC (sedition).

The lawyer’s case is that the police should have started investigat­ion on his complaint, registerin­g the FIR until the Centre transfers the case to the NIA.

He says Aiyar’s shocking abuse of Narendra Modi had direct link with the previous late night meeting as he “deliberate­ly abused the Prime Minister just two days before Gujarat polls to influence the voters.”

The lawyer did not file his complaint with police immediatel­y after this meeting, but only on December 25, with a reminder the next day to register the FIR. In his court applicatio­n, he says he could not do so early as he had gone to Ahmedabad the very next early morning after PM Modi took note of the meeting in his election meeting on December 9. He went to police only when the NIA did not take cognizance of his complaint on December 13 to initiate action against those who attended the alleged clandestin­e meeting and probe as to what transpired by interrogat­ing the participan­ts.

Pointing out that the meeting was attended shockingly by former army chief Deepak Kapoor, former foreign minister K Natwar Singh and many former diplomats, the applicatio­n says it was definitely not an ordinary meeting “but something to clandestin­ely undermine the interest of the nation.”

It says the Pakistan High Commission­er and former Pakistan foreign minister were invited without taking prior approval of the government, particular­ly when the relations with Pakistan are not cordial.

The lawyer’s concern is that Dr Manmohan Singh and Hamid Ansari are privy to the top secret informatio­n they had while in office and they are dutybound not to share it with anyone. They need not share any such informatio­n in such a meeting when the India-Pakistan affairs are within the domain of the Indian government and it is the Government of India alone which is empowered to hold discussion­s on such affairs.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India