NEW DELHI, March 3: The Delhi High Court on Monday asked the Delhi Police to file its reply on a bail plea filed by Neelam Azad, the sole woman accused arrested in the December 13, 2023 Parliament security breach case.
A bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta also issued notice to the prosecution on Azad’s application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal challenging a trial court’s September 11, 2024 order dismissing her bail plea.
The court noted there was a delay of 142 days in filing the appeal while the law stipulates a maximum of 90 days for doing the same.
Related Posts:
The high court, which initially said the delay was not condonable under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the appeal could not be entertained, was apprised of a Supreme Court order which stated that such appeals cannot be dismissed.
The high court was informed that recently the apex court has passed an order directing that appeals preferred by the accused will not be dismissed on account of non-condonation of delay beyond 90 days.
The prosecution contended that the appeal was not maintainable as it was barred by limitation and that Azad was allegedly part of a deep-rooted conspiracy with other co-accused and there was sufficient evidence that she was in contact with them over the phone.
The bench orally observed, “What was she (Azad) trying to do? In Parliament, she was throwing smoke canisters? What is this?”
Azad’s counsel said she was not carrying any explosives in the Parliament and was standing outside.
The court listed the matter for further hearing on April 16 and called for the electronic record of the trial court in the case.
During the arguments, the counsel appearing for Azad submitted before the high court that she was not involved in the breach of Parliament security and she had not entered the House. She was standing outside Parliament, the court was also told.
On the issue of delay in filing the appeal, the counsel said Azad belonged to a poor family and they had no money to come to Delhi.
However, the bench said the appeal was filed almost six months after the trial court passed the order.
The trial court had rejected Azad’s bail plea, saying there was sufficient evidence to believe that allegations against her were “prima facie” true.
It noted that all the accused persons — Azad, Manoranjan D, Sagar Sharma, Amol Dhanraj Shinde, Lalit Jha and Mahesh Kumawat — already had the knowledge about the threat given by designated terrorist Gurpatwant Singh Pannu for targeting Parliament on December 13, 2023.
Despite the threat perception, the accused persons being aware of the same carried out the alleged offence in Parliament on the same day, it observed.
In a major security breach on the anniversary of the 2001 Parliament terror attack, Sagar Sharma and Manoranjan D jumped into the Lok Sabha chamber from the public gallery during Zero Hour, released yellow gas from canisters and shouted slogans before they were overpowered by some MPs.
Around the same time, two other accused — Amol Shinde and Azad — sprayed coloured gas from canisters while shouting “tanashahi nahi chalegi” outside Parliament premises.
These four were taken into custody from the spot, while Jha and Kumawat were arrested later.
The prosecution had opposed the bail application, calling the offence “grave”. It was alleged that Azad was involved in disrupting the sovereignty and integrity of India. (PTI)
