The Delhi High Court on Monday issued a notice to an advocate representing Unnao rape survivor, asking why contempt action should not be initiated against him for causing hindrance in judicial proceedings by frequently interrupting during the hearing.
The Delhi High Court on Monday issued a notice to an advocate representing Unnao rape survivor, asking why contempt action should not be initiated against him for causing hindrance in judicial proceedings by frequently interrupting during the hearing. Advocate D K Mishra said the court issued notice against him on the grounds that he was trying to cause hindrance in proceedings related to the matter of an Uttar Pradesh Police constable challenging the framing of charges against him for the alleged murder of the Unnao rape survivor’s father.
He claimed Justice Suresh Kait while dictating the order said “why contempt action be not initiated against him”. Mishra, however, claimed that he did not do anything which could have invited contempt proceedings. The court was hearing a petition by UP constable Amir Khan, who is in judicial custody, seeking quashing of framing of charges, including murder and criminal conspiracy, against him. He has contended that the August 13 order was “illegal, improper, prejudicial and against established principles of criminal procedure code”.
The court listed his plea for further hearing on September 5. The plea said, “The trial judge in the impugned proceedings order and charges framed admitted that there is no role of the petitioner in the conspiracy of assaulting/ beatings to the survivor’s father. Thus, making the police officials including petitioner (Khan) liable for murder is untenable illegal.” His counsel had argued in the high court that Khan’s role was confined to lodging of FIR and that he signed the memo of recovery of weapon. The woman, allegedly raped by expelled BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar in 2017 when she was a minor, is battling for life after a truck rammed into her car in Uttar Pradesh’s Rae Bareli on July 28, killing two of her aunts.
Her lawyer was also injured in the accident. In the case related to her father’s death, the trial court had on August 13 charged Sengar and nine others for the offences punishable under sections 302 (murder), 506 (criminal intimidation), 341 (wrongful restraint), 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 193 (false evidence) of the IPC and under section 25 of the Arms Act.
The charges framed against them also included sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 166 (public servant disobeying law, with intent to cause injury to any person) and 167 (public servant framing an incorrect document with intent to cause injury) of IPC. The court had also cancelled the bail of three UP police officials — the then Makhi police station’s in-charge Ashok Singh Bhadauria, Sub Inspector Kamta Prasad and Khan — accused in the case, and sent them into custody after the charge of murder was framed against them. The accused denied the charges and claimed trial. The rape victim’s father was arrested on April 3, 2018 and died in judicial custody on April 9, 2018.