Jamia Violence: Delhi HC Refuses Interim Protection to Students, Shamed by Lawyers

New Delhi: Chants of “Shame, Shame” echoed in the Delhi High Court on December 19 after the judges, who were hearing a bunch of PILs against the violent police action in Jamia Millia Islamia, refused to give any interim relief and posted the matter for next hearing on February 4. The court denied interim protection from coercive action against students who have been booked by the Delhi Police under several sections.

As the division bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice C Hari Shankar announced the date for hearing, young lawyers were seen crying and their seniors consoling them, saying they would move the Supreme Court.

After hearing the arguments of the counsel, the bench issued notices to the Centre, the Delhi government and the Delhi Police to file replies.

The common and major demands of the petitioners include setting up an independent inquiry headed by a retired Supreme Court or a High Court judge to investigate the incident, immediate medical assistance be provided to all students who have sustained injuries and interim protection to students from any coercive action to be taken by the police.

Also read: Delhi HC to Hear PIL Seeking Fact-finding Committee to Look into Violence in Jamia

Representing one of the petitioners — Rizwan, senior advocate Vinay Garg, referring to an AIIMS report, argued that one student has lost eyesight because of the injuries he sustained in the brutal police crackdown in the Jamia campus on the evening of December 15. He appealed the court to order a judicial inquiry into the incident. He submitted that over 400 tear gas cannons have been fired by the police first time after the infamous Delhi gangrape of 2012 protest when around 180 cannons were fired. He further said 52 seriously injured students were even denied proper medical assistance.

After he concluded, senior advocate Sanjay Hegde rose appearing for other petitioners, arguing that the court has to decide what kind of fair inquiry needs to be taken into the incident, whether the police was allowed to use the force in the campus, and that the brute use of force against the students was uncalled for and what justified the use of force.

“The Delhi Police entered both the mosque and the library. Was there trouble in the hostels and the toilet which justified the police actions? Beating up should be the last resort, we cannot have resort to weaponry at the first instance,” he said. He also urged the court to direct the police to not take any action within the campus without giving prior information to the varsity authorities.

As Hegde concluded his arguments, senior counsel Indira Jaising — former solicitor general of India — said, “Students and police are pitted against each other. Lawyers can protect themselves, but how can we expect a vulnerable and traumatised student community to protect itself, to even exercise its rights against the police brutality,” she argued. She said the issue is about how a balance between the right to protest and free speech, and maintenance of law and order can be worked out. Narrating the incidents of police brutality inside the campus, she demanded that the concerned police officers be booked immediately.

“Delegated powers of the state should be exercised with great caution. Present case involves brutality and use of disproportionate force. Our case is that the police did not act within the framework of law,” she submitted. She also urged the court to pass the same order that it had passed in the Tis Hazarai court incident where the police had clashed with the lawyers. Arguing that no coercive action against the students be taken, she said, “In our country, process is the punishment.”

Pressing on the demand for an independent probe by a retired Supreme Court or High Court judge, she explained, “We would like peace to be restored and peace requires confidence building measures, which should come from the state. They should demonstrate confidence instead of quelling protest.”

“My concerns are unregulated arrests of students. Lawyers can take care of themselves. When students got arrested, had it not been for some citizens who visited police stations at night, students would still be in police stations,” she said.

Seeking similar relief, senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, representing petitioner Manoj Dhiryan, commenced his arguments. He argued that students cannot be held accountable for the rioting as they were returning from their march to Parliament and were attacked by the police. He said this is the worst attack on the minority students in the country. He also showed the pictures of injured students. To which, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta questioned, “Are you sure these pictures are from Jamia? Are you sure?”

Also read: How Violence Flared up in and Around Jamia on Sunday

Giving his assent, Gonsalves showed the court a picture of a senior Delhi Police officer attacking a student who was lying on the ground and a video clip of police personnel carrying a bottle inside a bus. “This was right before the burning of the bus,” he added.

Gonsalves showed another video footage of police damaging the bikes. “This was done to show that the agitators did it. This entire petition along with the CD was given to the SHO, Jamia Nagar police station and he said ‘we will see’,” he added.

He said the material evidence warrant an immediate inquiry into the incident, adding that the students were attacked in library, toilets and even in a mosque. “My first prayer is register an FIR,” he said. “The police entered the campus. One student has suffered gunshot injury, which the police has denied, one students has lost his eye. What was that emergency situation the police sought to avert. Their action was atrocious,” he said. He appealed the court to order authorities to preserve CCTV footage, which can be produced as an evidence before the judicial commission. “As the authorities are trying to tidy up the situation, we demand an immediate high-level inquiry,” he said.

Senior advocate Salman Khurshid addressed the court, saying, “I appeal on behalf of everyone that we need to now mend whatever has happened.” He narrated a “historic moment” from 1946 when then VC Zakir Hussain addressed a gathering during that time of turmoil and said, “Let us not ask who lit the fire, let us now douse that fire.” This is about a University that has come in a crossfire between disagreements, added Khurshid.

Also read: Police Crackdown on Jamia Strengthens Students’ Resolve to Fight CAA, NRC

After Golsalves and Khurshid, senior counsel Hariharan, while submitting his arguments, too, echoed his colleagues’ demand to set up a judicial commission for an independent probe into the incident. He said there is a need to inquire as to which police stations were involved in the process and who were the officers who entered the university campus.

After all the lawyers concluded their arguments, the court issued a notice to the Central government, the Delhi government and the Delhi Police to file their replies. The matter was adjourned till February 4. As the judges rose and began to move towards their chambers, few people present in the courtroom started shouting, “Shame! Shame! Justice has been denied!”