In a new twist to the Chandni Chowk MlA Alka lamba controversy related to the attack on her, the Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) has asked the Delhi Police to consider her as a public servant and register a case against those who tried to prevent her from performing her duty.
But the Delhi Police is believed to have told the DCW that the MlAs in Delhi do not fall under the category of public servants, hence she cannot be considered in that category.
lamba had claimed that she was prevented from carrying an anti-drug drive by the workers of the sweet shop allegedly managed by BJP MlA OP Sharma near the Hanuman Mandir in Yamuna Bazar area.
lamba had suffered a minor head injury after a man allegedly hurled a stone at her during the anti-drug drive.
In its reply to the Commission, the Delhi Police said it was clear that lamba was not a public servant under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Police said the AAP MlA had not been performing any duties of a public servant and as such offence under section 353 of IPC was also not made out. likewise, police said Section 332 of the IPC was also not applicable in the case as the prerequisite for it was that the person has to be a public servant, who had been voluntarily hurt while discharging her duties.
During the proceedings, DCW chairperson Swati Maliwal said the fact lamba was a public servant had not been considered in the stone pelting case. “In light of the above, on the face of the complaint, a cognizable offence under inter alia section 353 and 352 is disclosed requiring immediate registering of FIR under directions of the Supreme Courts constitutional bench.”
The IPC Section 353 states whoever assaults or uses criminal force to prevent a public servant from execution of his duty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. According to IPC Section 332, whoever voluntarily causes hurt to public servant while discharging his duty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
In a written statement, the Delhi Police has stated during her anti-drug drive she had forced some shops to shut down. “These actions will not fall within the meaning of public function as mandated under section 186 of the IPC,” police said.
Police concluded that keeping in view that no cognizable offence was made out on lamba’s complaint as a result of which no FIR can be registered.
Earlier, the case had taken a new turn with police registering an FIR against lamba after CCTV footage emerged showing her ransacking a shop and toppling a weighing scale machine.
Police said an employee of Shiv Snacks - where lamba and her associates had created a ruckus - was the complainant in the case. At the behest of the complainant, Santosh Kumar, police even registered a case against her for ransacking the place and also pushing a police constable.
While the accused, who had attacked her, was arrested on the spot, the AAP had pointed fingers at the BJP on Twitter and said the attack on lamba was a “conspiracy”. The BJP, on the other hand, said it had nothing to do with the incident which it felt was “staged”.