Hours after the Delhi High Court declined to give any interim protection to JNU students Umar Khalid, Anirban Bhattacharya against arrest in the sedition case, they surrendred before police on Tuesday night.
Earlier in the day, the High Court made it clear to them that it could not allow them to surrender in the manner they wished as it would amount to going by their “whims and fancies”. It also asked them to surrender and follow due process of law.
“There are procedures under the statute which have to be followed,” Justice Pratibha Rani said while expressing her disagreement with the plea of Khalid and Bhattacharya that they be given a safe passage and be allowed to choose the place of their surrender.
She said, “One should not exceed the scope of any petition and the prayer made in it” which included that the accused on surrender be sent to judicial custody by the High Court itself instead of producing them before a trial court.
“The remand proceedings have to be done by a trial court and it (high court) cannot go by their (the two petitioners’) whims and fancies.
“The moment the accused are arrested, he or she has to be produced within 24 hours before a trial court judge, who will decide the remand of the accused,” the judge said.
When advocate Kamini Jaiswal, appearing for the students, argued for the need for safe passage to surrender, Justice Rani shot back “What do you mean, I should give you safe passageIJ Why this court (not trial court)IJ let us go by the procedure.”
The two accused, who have been booked under sedition law for raising anti-national slogans on the campus, submitted they were constantly receiving “life threats” and police were not taking adequate measures to protect them.
The court, however, asked the two to mention a place for their surrender, other than the high court, confidentiality of which will be maintained. The court also asked the petitioners to indicate which lawyers would be accompanying the duo during the surrender process.
The two accused stated in their application that after last week’s attack on JNUSU president Kanhaiya Kumar in Patiala House Courts by lawyers, they fear that they would be attacked if they were to be taken to the Patiala House Courts, and alleged that they are more vulnerable to unprovoked attacks than Kanhaiya Kumar.
Advocate Kamini Jaiswal said the students had to file the surrender application due to “exceptional circumstances” having been created. She pointed out that JNUSU president Kanhaiya Kumar had been beaten up while in police custody, and that sting operations shown in the media had indicated that a section of lawyers was “ready to attack” the other students involved in the JNU protests. She also argued for “permission for peaceful surrender before the Delhi High court.”
The submissions made by Jaiswal were objected to by the DCP present in the courtroom, following which the judge called the DCP and Jaiswal to her chamber, and held a closed hearing.
The court has now indicated that it will hear the matter in detail again on Wednesday, and declined to pass any orders when Jaiswal raised arguments for interim protection.