New Delhi -°C
Today in New Delhi, India

Nov 15, 2019-Friday
-°C

Humidity
-

Wind
-

Select city

Metro cities - Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata

Other cities - Noida, Gurgaon, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Bhopal , Chandigarh , Dehradun, Indore, Jaipur, Lucknow, Patna, Ranchi

Friday, Nov 15, 2019

2011 prohibitory order violation: Ludhiana MP Ravneet Singh Bittu acquitted

Prosecution could not produce enough evidence to prove that Bittu took out a procession of Youth Congress workers outside PGIMER in March 2011

chandigarh Updated: Aug 27, 2019 12:43 IST
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent, Chandigarh
The case came on the complaint of the then UT police sub-inspector Eram Rizvi, and charges were framed against Bittu on February 2 last year.
The case came on the complaint of the then UT police sub-inspector Eram Rizvi, and charges were framed against Bittu on February 2 last year.(HT File photo)
         

A local court on Monday acquitted member of Parliament (MP) from Ludhiana Ravneet Singh Bittu in a 2011 case of violation of prohibitory order, as the prosecution could not produce enough evidence to prove its case.

The case dates back to March 17, 2011, when Bittu was booked for allegedly taking out a procession and raising slogans in Chandigarh in violation of Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) imposed by the deputy commissioner (DC). Section 144 prohibits assembly of more than four persons in an area.

A case under Section 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was registered against Bittu at the Sector-11 police station for allegedly taking out a procession of over 200 workers of Youth Congress and gathering near gate number 1 of Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER).

The case came on the complaint of the then UT police sub-inspector Eram Rizvi, and charges were framed against Bittu on February 2 last year.

EVIDENCE INADEQUATE

In the court, defence counsel Terminder Singh contested that Bittu was falsely implicated in the case. He argued that the alleged order of DC was not with the prosecution or Rizvi, nor was it published in any newspaper.

Terminder argued that no independent witness was examined from whom the order passed by the DC was received. He added that even the original FIR was not produced during the trial.

After hearing the arguments, the court acquitted Bittu, who said, “I had full faith in the judiciary. Truth has prevailed and justice has been done by the court.”