The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear on October 26 an application seeking a first information report (FIR) against Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi over an alleged pushing incident in which a woman journalist was injured during an Opposition march inside the Supreme Court precincts on October 12. The application also seeks preservation of CCTV footage and other records relating to the incident. Track live updates on Delhi protest
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant said the application would be heard along with other matters related to the protests on October 26.
Pregnant journalist alleges being pushed by security personnel
The application moved by advocate Digant Mishra and others highlighted the incident involving journalist Richa Parashar, who works with news website OneIndia. She alleged that she was pushed by Gandhi’s security personnel when she extended her microphone to seek his statement. She fell and sustained injuries. Parashar, who is three months pregnant, was hospitalised following the incident.
Deep Dive
When will the Supreme Court hear the plea seeking an FIR against Rahul Gandhi over the alleged journalist injury?
What does the application ask the court to do about the October 12 incident?
Why was the journalist injured during the October 12 march?
The application sought a direction to the Delhi Police to forthwith register an FIR under Section 74 (assault on a woman with intent to outrage her modesty), Section 115(2) (voluntarily causing hurt) and Section 131 (assault or use of criminal force), read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and other applicable provisions of law, against Gandhi and every other person involved in the alleged assault.
{{/usCountry}}The application sought a direction to the Delhi Police to forthwith register an FIR under Section 74 (assault on a woman with intent to outrage her modesty), Section 115(2) (voluntarily causing hurt) and Section 131 (assault or use of criminal force), read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and other applicable provisions of law, against Gandhi and every other person involved in the alleged assault.
{{/usCountry}}The application further sought preservation of the complete CCTV footage of the gates, steps, driveways and approaches within the Supreme Court premises for October 12, along with the access-control logs, entry passes and visitor records for that day.
Court to not take suo motu cognisance
Senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia mentioned the application for urgent listing, pointing out that when the court was informed about the incident on Thursday, the bench remarked that it would not take suo motu cognisance and would consider the matter if an application or petition was filed before it.
The CJI said the application would be heard along with Mishra’s petition, which was heard on Thursday. Mishra had objected to the manner in which Gandhi and other Opposition leaders, accompanied by a large gathering of lawyers, entered the Supreme Court precincts despite not having obtained security clearance for such a gathering.
The petition also sought a neutral framework to regulate processions and demonstrations in and around the judicial complexes of constitutional courts, an absolute prohibition on political protests inside judicial complexes, and guidelines on the decorum to be maintained by political parties and their leaders within judicial campuses.