Punjab and Haryana HC asked Advocate General as to why it has made arrangement of 3200 police personnels for the movement of Baba from Haryana to Punjab, when it failed to make similar arrangement when PM Modi visited Punjab. Court also noted that since SIT in its reply to the petition has mentioned that 3200 police personnels "has been/will be" deployed for movement of Baba, it clearly shows that even SIT admits that there is chance of serious law and order problem like one happened in Panchkula in 2017 when baba was arrested
On Thursday, Punjab and Haryana High Court heard the petitions filed by Baba Gurmeet Singh Ram Rahim, one seeking anticipatory bail and other seeking quashing of order dated 25.10.2021 passed by the lower court allowing application of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) thereby allowing production of Baba from Sunariya Jail, Rohtak, Haryana to Fridkot, Punjab. SIT sought production of baba for investigation/interroagtion wrt to sacrilege incidents that happened in Punjab in 2015.
On 28.10.2021, the High Court stayed this order and permitted the SIT only to interrogate Baba in Jail.
When the matter was listed, the Hon'ble Court took note of the security lapse that happened yesterday when PM Modi was in Punjab and asked the Ld. Advocate General as to why it has made arrangement of 3200 police personnels for the movement of Baba from Haryana to Punjab, when it failed to make similar arrangement when PM Modi visited Punjab. Court also noted that since SIT in its reply to the petition has mentioned that 3200 police personnels "has been/will be" deployed for movement of Baba, it clearly shows that even SIT admits that there is chance of serious law and order problem like one happened in Panchkula in 2017 when baba was arrested. Court further noted that this matter will not be heard till election is over and permitted the SIT to interrogate baba in jail only.
Matter was heard virtually and Mr. R. Venkataramani, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Chitvan Singhal, Advocate, Mr. Amit Tiwari, Advocate and Mr. Jitender Khurana, Advocate appeared for the petitioner in CRM-M-45187-2021(Quashing Petition).
Mr. Vinod Ghai, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Kanika Ahuja, Advocate, Ms. Kirti Ahuja, Advocate, and Mr. Abhishek Sanghi, Advocate appeared for the Petitioner in CRWP-10342-2021(Anticipatory bail)
Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Advocate General, Punjab appeared for State.
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments