E-Paper
Atishi’s video row: Delhi Assembly again demand case documents from Punjab officials
Once operational, the centre will cater not only to Patiala but also to nearby districts, ensuring timely treatment for accident victims and critically ill patients, he said.
Delhi Assembly has again sought documents related to a case registered in Jalandhar over a video clip that showed leader of opposition (LoP) Atishi’s alleged remarks against Sikh gurus.
The Assembly Secretariat on Friday wrote to the additional chief secretary (home), director general of police and other officers in Punjab, seeking their replies by February 20. It has also directed the additional chief secretary of Punjab to submit copies of the FIR registered in Jalandhar, the complaint based on which the case was registered, and the reports of forensics lab, social media expert and technical cell of the police.
The matter springs from an alleged remark made by Atishi in the winter session of Delhi Assembly in January. The BJP leaders had alleged that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader’s remark was derogatory against Sikh gurus, and shared a video clip of Assembly recordings on social media.
Meanwhile, Punjab police registered a case against sharing of the video clip, based on a forensic lab report that claimed it was “doctored”. The issue was later referred to the Delhi Assembly’s Privileges Committee and on the directions of speaker Vijender Gupta, the video clip was sent for another forensic examination. This forensic lab report claimed that the video shared by the BJP leaders was not tampered.
Atishi, in her submission to the Privileges Committee, has denied the charge against her and demanded the Assembly recordings. The Assembly Secretariat, in its letter to Punjab officers, said that their replies and documents are required to be submitted within the stipulated time for consideration by the Privileges Committee in accordance with the Rules of Procedure, the failure of which may be treated as constituting a breach of privilege and contempt.
Replies of the Punjab officers and document copies were earlier sought by the Assembly by February 12.
“However, neither your comments nor the information/documents have been received by this Secretariat by the stipulated time. The chairperson has directed to inform you that matters of privilege are particular to the person to whom it is addressed and reply/comments have to be submitted by that person to the committee,” the letters read.
