Court dismisses Alka Lamba plea in assault case
A city court on Friday dismissed Congress leader Alka Lamba’s plea challenging a magistrate’s order, which directed framing of charges in a case related to an assault on police personnel during a protest at the Jantar Mantar in 2024.
Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh, hearing Lamba’s revision plea against the December 2025 order, underlined that the magisterial court had exercised its judicial mind in concluding that a prima facie case was made out against her.
The prosecution had accused the Congress leader of obstructing police and blocking a public road while holding a protest in support of women’s reservation at the Jantar Mantar on July 29, 2024. On December 19, the magistrate had ordered framing charges for the offences of assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from discharge of duty, obstruction of a public official, disobedience to an order duly promulgated by a public servant and danger or obstruction in a public way.
In its order passed on Friday, the court said, “The trial court (magistrate) has exercised its judicial mind to sift through the statements of eyewitnesses and the electronic evidence and has concluded that a prima facie case exists. The standard for framing charges is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt but sufficient ground for proceeding.”
Rejecting Lamba’s arguments regarding the lack of independent witnesses, the absence of injuries and the nature of dissent, the court said that these aspects needed to be established during the trial and could not be prejudged.
“As there is no patent illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in the impugned (magistrate’s) order, the present revision petition fails and is dismissed,” the court said.
It noted the magisterial court’s observation that Lamba, in video evidence, could be seen jumping the first barricade and leading protesters to push a chain of women police officers and subsequently lying on the public road, and that after successfully jumping the second barricade, she vanished after reaching Tolstoy Road.
The court said that according to the magistrate, the statements of the complainant (a head constable) and other police officials indicated that Lamba was instrumental in leading demonstrators out of the permissible area, using criminal force against officers and willfully disobeying a promulgated order.
It said, “Thus, it is not merely on the videos that the charge has been framed. Besides the videos, there are statements of eyewitnesses and even if there is some variance between the versions of the eyewitnesses and the videos in question, it would be a question of trial and cannot be prejudged at this stage.”
Regarding Lamba’s argument that the protest was made at the “exempted” Jantar Mantar area, the court said that the exempted zone status was within the first line of barricades and she could not claim any immunity after climbing and jumping the first line of barricades, attempting to breach the second line of barricades with other protesters, and then managing to slip away from the side of the barricades.
It said, “The record shows that although Jantar Mantar was exempted, the revisionist (Lamba) led a march beyond that area towards Parliament with the intent to gherao (siege) the building.” The court also rejected Lamba’s argument about the lack of independent witnesses, saying even a police official is a competent witness in the eyes of the law whose testimony cannot be doubted merely because he is from the police.
