NEW DELHI: Delhi Police on Friday registered an FIR in connection with the pellet gun injury case under Sections 118 and 125 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
The case was registered followed a sit-in protest by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi demanding an FIR over the complaint by pellet gun shelling victim Sahil Lochav. The victim had said that FIR had not been lodged over his complaint.
Sources had earlier said that the complaint is being examined to determine whether a new case can be registered in accordance with the Supreme Court’s order.
Section 118 of the BNS deals with voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means, while Section 125 deals with acts endangering the life or personal safety of others.
Rahul Gandhi reached Parliament Street police station earlier in the day and was joined by several party leaders including his sister Priyanka Gandhi Vadra.
“Pellet gun was used at Connaught Place on 20th July. AIIMS report clearly says that there are more than 200 shells inside his body and 3 in his eye. He has lost vision in that eye. There are shells near his heart that cannot be touched. Delhi Police say they did not fire pellet guns. So, there is just one question: someone must have done it…A crime has indeed happened,” Rahul Gandhi said earlier.
“We are demanding that an FIR be registered. They told us that they have received order from the top and they cannot file an FIR. We won’t budge from here until an FIR is registered…All we demand is justice for this family…In this country, Amit Shah’s Home Ministry and Delhi Police personnel won’t let justice happen,” he added.
Congress members gathered outside the Parliament Street Police Station in support of the party’s demand.
Union Minister JP Nadda on Friday slammed Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over protest at Parliament Street Police Station, saying the Supreme Court has already taken cognisance of the July 20th incident and has constituted a five-member high-powered committee headed by a former judge and alleged that the Congress leader was indulging in “camera-centric drama merely to keep himself in the headlines”.
Nadda alleged that Rahul Gandhi, who is Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, had indulged in “cheap, attention-seeking politics” outside the Sansad Marg police station.
He said the Congress leader’s sit-in protest today is neither for the students nor for the sake of justice.
“The entire nation is once again witnessing the kind of cheap, attention-seeking politics that Rahul Gandhi displayed today outside the Sansad Marg police station. Rahul Gandhi’s sit-in protest today is neither for the students nor for the sake of justice; it is a symbol of the Congress party’s political desperation and Rahul Gandhi’s hunger for media attention,” he said.
“The whole country knows that the Supreme Court has already taken cognisance of the July 20th incident and has constituted a five-member high-powered committee headed by a former judge. When the country’s apex court is investigating the matter, what does Rahul Gandhi hope to prove by sitting in front of cameras outside the police station? Does the Leader of the Opposition lack faith in the country’s judiciary? The truth is that Rahul Gandhi is staging this ‘camera-centric’ drama merely to keep himself in the headlines,” he added.
The BJP leader alleged that the “drama” is related to the “criticism Congress is facing on the ‘Vande Matram’ issue and Rahul Gandhi is seeking to divert attention.
“If we consider the timing of this entire drama, we realize that the Congress party is currently facing intense criticism across the nation over the issue of ‘Vande Mataram’. The public is demanding answers from the Congress regarding the disrespect shown to the national song, especially as a senior Congress leader was seen cutting a cake designed to look like the Tricolour,” he said.
“To conceal this anti-national face of his and to divert attention from the massive embarrassment he has faced, Rahul Gandhi has hastily orchestrated this new drama as a distraction,” he added.
Pellet gun shelling victim Sahil Lochav said at Parliament Street Police Station that FIR has not been filed on his complaint.
“On 20th July, pellet guns were fired at me. I was admitted to Lady Hardinge, from there, I was referred to AIIMS. I underwent surgery at AIIMS. But the vision in my eye is still not clear. On 14th August, I wrote a 7-page complaint and gave to my lawyer…But the FIR has not been registered,” he said.
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh earlier said that the party has a simple demand that FIR should be registered.
“Our demand is simple – register an FIR and give us the FIR number. Sahil has made a genuine demand that an FIR should be registered. LoP Rahul Gandhi is giving voice to this demand. Sahil has demanded an FIR on the illegal action of using a pellet gun by the police. Rahul ji is clear that until a new FIR is registered, we will not leave from here (Parliament Street PS). What we are doing is as per the Constitution,” he added.
Supreme Court on Thursday constituted a five-member High-Powered Expert Committee (HPEC), headed by retired apex court Justice R Subhash Reddy, to conduct a fact-finding exercise into allegations of police excesses as well as violence by protesters during the recent Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)-led demonstrations.
The committee comprises former Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Ravi Shankar Jha, former Delhi High Court Justice Shalinder Kaur, former CBI Director Rishi Kumar Shukla and former Meghalaya DGP LR Bishnoi.
A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said the panel would examine the various grievances raised by both protesters and police authorities in connection with the demonstrations.
The bench said the HPEC should give priority to allegations of excessive use of force by police, violence by protesters and allegations of harassment and molestation of women protesters.
It also permitted the panel to examine whether interim compensation should be granted to persons injured during the protests, including both police personnel and protesters. The apex court made clear that the committee’s mandate would not be limited to a one-time inquiry and directed the HPEC to periodically submit interim findings so that the Court could assess the situation and issue further directions wherever necessary.
The bench also directed that CCTV recordings of the protests and body-camera footage from police and security personnel, which had earlier been ordered to be preserved, be handed over to the committee for examination. At the same time, the top court clarified that the formation of the HPEC would not prevent police or other security authorities from initiating departmental or disciplinary proceedings against officers found to have violated applicable rules.
“The constitution of the HPEC by us shall in no way deter or debar the Police authorities or other security forces from taking administrative or disciplinary action,” the order stated.
