UP Govt rejects Varun’s charges on invoking NSA | india | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Apr 27, 2017-Thursday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

UP Govt rejects Varun’s charges on invoking NSA

The state government said the NSA was invoked against Varun Gandhi for his hate speeches and the chaos created by him while surrendering before a court on 28 March

india Updated: Apr 11, 2009 17:30 IST

New Delhi: Rejecting Varun Gandhi’s charge that he was booked under National Security Act (NSA) due to political reasons, the UP government on Saturday told the Supreme Court that his recent speeches in Pilibhit had communal overtones and blamed the BJP candidate for the chaos on the day of his surrender.
In its 35-page response to the notice issued by the apex court on 2 April, the state government said the inflammatory statement by Varun and the manner in which he surrendered for the cases registered against him amount to the breach of public order warranting invocation of the NSA against him.
The state government and the district magistrate of Pilibhit said the NSA was invoked against Varun for his speeches "having communal overtones and the chaos created by him while surrendering before a court on 28 March".
The state government contended that there was no need for the authority to supply entire material including the CDs of the speeches and events relating to Varun’s surrender for booking him under NSA. It denied the allegation that NSA was imposed against him with any political motive or to sabotage his electoral debut.
The apex court will hear the matter on 13 April.
Varun, 29, had moved the court challenging his detention under NSA for his alleged hate speeches in Pilibhit last month. He was taken to the Piliibhit district jail and later shifted to Etah jail for security reasons.
The apex court had sought a response from the UP government after Varun’s counsel and senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi and Sourav Kirpal had alleged that the district magistrate slapped the NSA without authority.
They contended that the state government had not passed any order as required under the law for the local administration to take such a measure and accused the district magistrate of acting independently.
Is Your Couch Making You Cough?
Promotional Feature