This piece delves into the comprehensive details of the complaint, highlighting  accusations against high-ranking officials of the Election Commission of India (ECI), engineers from Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) and Electronics Corporation of India Limited (ECIL), and prominent leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), including Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Amit Shah, and J.P. Nadda. 

The complaint outlines a systematic and far-reaching conspiracy purportedly designed to influence the election results in favour of the BJP, compromising the integrity and transparency of the electoral process. Through meticulous documentation of incidents, evidence of tampering, and procedural violations, this piece aims to present a coherent and detailed account of the allegations, demanding an immediate and thorough investigation to uphold the democratic principles of free and fair elections in India.

Advocate Mehmood Pracha has filed a comprehensive criminal complaint alleging manipulation of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. The complaint is against The Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), Rajiv Kumar, Election Commissioners Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, Officials and engineers of Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) and Electronics Corporation of India Limited (ECIL), Mr. Narendra Modi,  Mr. Amit Shah and Mr. J.P. Nadda of the Bharatiya Janata Party and other known and unknown persons involved in aiding the BJP to secure an unjust victory. 

Core contentions of the complaint

Use of EVM’s instead of ballot papers

The complaint states that elections are legally required to be conducted via ballot papers unless specific conditions allow for Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). The 2024 elections, however, were conducted using EVMs in a manner that allegedly compromised both transparency and security, systematically favouring the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its allies.

According to the complaint, at the beginning of the election process for the 7-Rampur Lok Sabha Constituency in U.P., a meeting was held between the Returning Officer (RO), other election officials, and all candidates. This meeting was audio-video recorded by the RO. During the meeting, Advocate Pracha informed the RO that elections are required to be held through ballot papers, with EVMs permissible only under a special notification as per Section 61A of the RPA. The RO stated readiness to conduct elections via ballot papers if the ECI issued the necessary instructions but failed to provide any such notification, proceeding instead with EVMs.

Adv. Pracha filed Writ Petition (Civil) 5037 of 2024 in the Delhi High Court. On April 6, 2024, the ECI sent a copy of a notification dated March 20, 2024 under Section 61A. This notification however, appeared to be manipulated states the complaint as it was not available online until April 6, .2024, despite the election schedule being announced on March 16, 2024.

Adv. Pracha therefore requests for a thorough investigation to be conducted in order to examine the official files and records at the ECI head office, focusing on the preparation of the notification and the alleged conspiracy to issue an illegal and omnibus notification.

Manipulations of the EVM’s  

The complaint implicates senior ECI officials, including CEC Rajiv Kumar and Election Commissioners Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, accusing them of orchestrating a wide-ranging conspiracy to manipulate EVMs. This manipulation extended to other senior ECI officials both at the headquarters and those deputed in various constituencies.

Individuals affiliated with the BJP, such as Mansukhbhai Shamjibhai Khachariya, Dr. Shivnath Yadav, Ms. Shyama Singh, Mr. PV Parthasarathi, and Mr. Krishna Bihari Rai, were appointed as Directors in BEL and ECIL. These appointments according to the complaint were a part of a broader scheme to keep the EVM manufacturing process secretive and manipulatable. 

The complaint states that key components of the EVMs, particularly the microcontrollers, were imported from undisclosed foreign manufacturers. The software or source code for these microcontrollers was ported in a secretive manner to facilitate manipulation. Serial numbers on various EVM components were not permanently affixed, which made it easier to swap machines during the election process without detection. The accessories used with the EVMs, such as wires, batteries, and paper rolls, were uncertified and unverified, further compromising the integrity of the election process.

A significant number of EVMs used in the 2019 election process are reported to be missing records the complaint. The Election Commission of India (ECI) acknowledges this issue as sub-judice, as stated in their FAQs.

Transportation, storage and commissioning irregularities 

On April 8.2024, Adv. Pracha observed EVMs being transported in open, non-containerized trucks without security personnel. The EVMs lacked permanently engraved serial numbers and had detachable stickers, facilitating potential tampering.

The warehouse storing the EVMs was maintained illegally and unsafely. There was no clear distinction between EVMs meant for training and those for actual elections, violating guidelines and facilitating manipulation. Adv. Pracha has audio-video recordings of the warehouse and transportation and has requested further videography from ECI officials.

During the commissioning process on April 9, 2024 in Rampur, authorized engineers from BEL and ECIL were absent. Adv. Pracha signed a pink slip and made a note in the register as evidence. Later, he encountered individuals claiming to be BEL engineers at the Collectorate, but they were not engaged in any procedures.

At the Mandi, the designated venue for commissioning, Adv. Pracha observed various devices and accessories, such as a large computer mouse-like device (SLU), wires, batteries, and paper rolls, lying in bulk without seals or certification. BEL team leader Mr. Navyajyoti explained the SLU usage and stated that data was stored by the ECI’s local unit at Moradabad, not by his team.

Local officials attempted to prevent Pracha from witnessing the process and communicating with the engineer. Pracha and his associates were threatened with false criminal charges by ECI officials, aiming to intimidate and prevent them from reporting the tampering. The Central Observer’s intervention was necessary to normalize the situation.

ECI officials “conspired to misappropriate election funds by mishandling the videography procedure and safekeeping of EVM-VVPAT machines”, states the complaint, “recording fewer and shorter videos than required. Substandard and insecure infrastructure was used for the transportation, storage, and safekeeping of the machines.”

Several emails were written to the Returning Officer and other ECI officials, including the CEC, highlighting the illegalities witnessed regarding the mishandling and tampering of EVM-VVPAT machines. No corrective measures were attempted despite these communications.

Election day and post-polling manipulation

As stated in the complaint, on April 18, 2024, during the commissioning and distribution of machines, ECI officials mishandled the machines. They used mobile phones and electronics at the venue, with no security checks at entry/exit points. Unauthorized personnel could freely enter and exit, potentially tampering with the machines.

As per the complaint, even after polling on April 19, 2024, mishandling and tampering continued. Machines were brought back to the Mandi for sealing and storage at the warehouse, where officials were seen working on the machines and election papers at night, violating legal provisions. Videography from this period could establish the manipulation of machines and other materials by polling parties.

Despite multiple complaints and letters detailing these issues, the ECI took no corrective action. Notable communications include those dated March 28.,  2024, April, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 16, 17 and 19, 2024.

Conspiracy and forgery to influence elections

The criminal complaint accuses officials at the Election Commission of India (ECI) of orchestrating a conspiracy to influence election outcomes through falsification and destruction of critical documents. Specifically, ECI guidelines require that copies of Form 17C, detailing votes polled, remain unsealed with Returning Officers. However, according to the complaint, these records were allegedly destroyed to manipulate the vote count. The complaint further alleges that senior officials at the ECI’s head office in Delhi engaged in forgery, manipulation, and tampering of records to present misleading information in affidavits submitted to the Supreme Court of India. This main conspiracy, alleges the complaint, centered at the ECI’s headquarters at Nirvachan Sadan in Delhi, involved clandestine meetings and other activities aimed at subverting the electoral process.

Manifestation of the manipulation

Numerous malfunctions and anomalies in EVMs suggest nationwide manipulation to benefit the BJP alleges the complaint. It is stated that reports indicate a mismatch between the total number of votes polled and the total number of votes finally counted in 538 Parliamentary Constituencies. In Rampur, the total votes counted were 456 less than the total votes polled, suggesting a conspiracy to alter election results.

Request for investigation

Adv. Pracha through his complaint has called for:

• Immediate registration of a report under Section 129 of the Representation of the People’s Act, 1951, Section 65/66/66F of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 171F/409/417/466/120B/201/34 Indian Penal Code.
• Investigation into the roles of all involved, including ECI officials, BEL and ECIL engineers, and BJP members.
• Seizure and forensic analysis of manipulated EVMs and related materials.
• Preservation and review of all videography and CCTV footage related to the election process.
• Examination of official files and records at the ECI head office to uncover details of the alleged conspiracy.

Conclusion

Transparent elections are the lifeblood of any democracy, ensuring that the voice of every citizen is heard and respected. Free and fair electoral processes uphold the fundamental rights of voters, guaranteeing that their choices shape the future of their nation without interference or manipulation.

Advocate Mehmood Pracha’s meticulous documentation and unwavering pursuit of justice in his criminal complaint against election officials and BJP leaders underscore the critical importance of maintaining electoral integrity. His detailed allegations of EVM tampering, procedural irregularities, and systematic misconduct demand not just attention but immediate action to uphold democratic principles.

In exposing these alleged violations, Pracha has highlighted potential threats to the democratic fabric of IndiaThe authorities have formally accepted the complaint and it is now to left to be seen how investigation proceeds in the matter.

The complaint can be read here: 

Related:

EVM Malfunction or manipulation?

Phase 6 Polling: Reports of voting manipulation and sporadic violence continue, AAP claims “slow voting” in Delhi

EVM Malfunction: Does Criminalisation Deter Genuine Complaints?

Making Every Vote Matter

Election symbols controversy: violation of democratic principles in Satara, M’tra

The post Legal storm brews: criminal complaint by adv Mehmood Pracha alleges massive election manipulation by ECI and senior BJP leaders appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Dr. Pankaj Sharma disposed of Advocate Mehmood Pracha’s application challenging Delhi Police Special Cell’s second raid, after observing that the objections raised by him are baseless.

LiveLaw reported that the order read, “The plea of the applicant about his offer of target data in pen drive can only be considered by the IO subject to the issue of admissibility and Court’s intervention is not proper and also accused cannot dictate the IO about the mode and manner for collection of evidence in an investigation. Accordingly, in the considered view of this Court, the objections raised by the applicant are baseless. Let the search warrant be executed in accordance with law subject to the safeguards as per the expert opinion.”

The order further states, “The expert opinion reflects that if the hard disc is submitted in FSL the ‘target data’ can be retrieved without any alteration to the meta data associated with ‘target data’, without creating any evidential vulnerabilities as the data will be retrieved forensically. Also, it will not affect the data stored in hard disc relating to other clients of the applicant”, reported Bar & Bench.

Judge Sharma further said that the collection of evidence was intrinsic to the investigation and “hands of the investigators cannot be tied” to prevent them from collecting evidence. On the issue of reliance under section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act (attorney-client privilege) and Bar Council Conduct Rules, the Court observed that such a reliance was “misplaced” as the same envisages voluntary sharing of data /communication by the Advocate or deposing against the client, according to LiveLaw.

On March 9, the Delhi Police’s Special Cell raided the office of Advocate Mehmood Pracha who represents many people accused in the Delhi violence for the second time. Thereafter, Pracha had moved the court and the judge stayed the operation of the search warrant issued by the Special Cell, till the pendency of the application.

Pracha had submitted, “It is my fundamental and constitutional right to protect the interest of my clients. To save their integrity. They have deliberately put my and my client’s life under threat. This is also sensitive data. They want to act under their political masters. I cannot give such data. If you want to hang me, do it. But I cannot sacrifice my attorney privilege communication.”  

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) Pankaj Sharma of the Patiala House Court had also directed the Delhi Police to file its response on how it proposed to access Mehmood Pracha’s computer and his pen drive, without disclosing any information pertaining to his other clients.

Related:

Advocate Mehmood Pracha’s office raided again!

Delhi court stays search warrant for Adv. Mehmood Pracha’s office raid

Mehmood Pracha raids: Delhi court asks police how they plan to protect lawyer-client privilege

The post Delhi Court rejects plea by Mehmood Pracha against raids at his office appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) Pankaj Sharma of the Patiala House Court directed the Delhi Police to file its response on how it proposed to access Mehmood Pracha’s computer and his pen drive, without disclosing any information pertaining to his other clients, reported Bar & Bench.

The CMM while noting that his hard disk in connection with which a search warrant was issued, also contained data about his clients, said that his concerns relating to the protection of privileged communication have to be addressed.

Bar & Bench quoted CMM Sharma saying, “The protection available under section 126 of Indian Evidence Act makes it imperative for that the Court protect the data/files relating to communication of clients with applicant stored in the hard disk from interference of police while collecting target data (the complaint for which search warrant was obtained).”

In view of this, the CMM asked the Delhi Police to clarify how it proposed to receive target data of pen drive without creating any evidential vulnerabilities and receive target data without alternation to metadata to prevent further evidential vulnerabilities sans any disclosure of the other files/data stored in hard disk, as per a Bar & Bench report.

On March 11, the Patiala House court had stayed the search warrant issued by the Special Cell on the urgent application moved by Advocate Pracha against the raid. His submission read, “It is my fundamental and constitutional right to protect the interest of my clients. To save their integrity. They have deliberately put me and my client’s life under threat. This is also sensitive data. They want to act under their political masters. I cannot give such data. If you want to hang me, do it. But I cannot sacrifice my attorney privilege communication.”

Mehmood Pracha’s firm has been exposed to two search raids conducted by the Delhi Police. The first one was carried out on December 24 last year that started from noon (12 PM) and continued till 3 AM on December 25. Subsequently, he had moved the court seeking preservation of copies of the video footage of the raids conducted by Delhi police in his office that was granted by the Magisterial court.

The second raid took place on March 9, reportedly in his absence. Pracha’s colleagues told the media that more than 100 policemen were at the office and the search began at 12.30 in the afternoon to seize laptops and computers for some metadata of emails.

The matter will now be taken up on March 19.

Related:

Delhi court stays search warrant for Adv. Mehmood Pracha’s office raid

Advocate Mehmood Pracha’s office raided again!

Jurists, advocates condemn Delhi Police raid on Advocate Mahmood Pracha

Adv Mehmood Pracha’s Office raid: Court summons IO for video footage

The post Mehmood Pracha raids: Delhi court asks police how they plan to protect lawyer-client privilege appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A Delhi Court has granted stay after Advocate Mahmood Pracha moved an urgent application against the second raid conducted in his office by Delhi Police. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Pankaj Sharma stayed the operation of the search warrant issued by the Special Cell, till the pendency of the application. The matter will be next heard on March 12.

“It is my fundamental and constitutional right to protect the interest of my clients. To save their integrity. They have deliberately put my and my clients life under threat. This is also sensitive data. They want to act under their political masters. I cannot give such data. If you want to hang me, do it. But I cannot sacrifice my attorney privilege communication,” quoted LiveLaw as Pracha’s submission.

According to LiveLaw, Pracha stated that he was willing to provide data under sec. 65B certificate under the Indian Evidence Act, however he denied doing so in any other situation.

When SPP Amit Prasad proposed that Pracha should give a mirror copy of the data and delete relevant portions of his clients’ data, he vehemently opposed the same with the reasoning that data can be easily retrieved from a mirror copy. A mirror backup is an exact copy of the selected folders and files from the source being backed up, and if a file is deleted from the source, it gets deleted from the mirror back up as well.

Pracha reportedly said, “How hard it is to retrieve data from mirror copy? They know it and I know it. Special cell is expert to hack data. I am giving them the emails. But they want that data. They can have data which will be videographed. But what is their interest to have the hard copy only?”

LiveLaw further quoted Pracha as saying, “I am offering my neck to save my clients life. I am willing to face gallows for protecting my clients life. I am ready to be the lamb. Tell your political masters to hang me. But I will not let them harm my life. Come what may.”

On March 9, Delhi Police’s Special Cell raided Pracha’s office who represents many people accused in the Delhi violence. The raid was conducted in Pracha’s absence when he was at a a cross-examination of a case, and he claims that Special Cell he would not be there and chose that particular date for the search. His office was raided once before in December 2020 after which he had moved the court seeking preservation of copies of the video footage of the raids conducted by Delhi police in his office that was granted by the Magisterial court.

“They want the laptops and computers, they are saying they need some meta data of the emails when we are saying we have sent the emails from our email ID, so there is no doubt about it. They are saying they have to take all the computers for this,” Pracha’s associate was quoted to have said.

Related:

Advocate Mehmood Pracha’s office raided again!

113 hours raiding multiple locations, it is still not clear why the ED is investigations Newsclick

ED Raids & NewsClick: Weaponising law by Criminalising Free Speech

The post Delhi court stays search warrant for Adv. Mehmood Pracha’s office raid appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On March 9, Delhi Police’s Special Cell once again raided the office of Advocate Mehmood Pracha who represents many people accused in the Delhi violence. The raid took place in his absence, reported The Wire. His office was searched by the Police for the first time in December last year.

Scroll.in quoted Pracha saying that the search was conducted in his absence as well as the other associates. “Our office was locked and they (the police) knew that I would not be there because I would be undertaking a cross-examination of a Special Cell case only, in which the senior investigating officer is the same. So, they knew that I would not be there. They still chose a date where I will not be there in the office,” he said.

An associate who works at Pracha’s office, told Scroll.in that more than 100 policemen were at the office and the search began at 12.30 in the afternoon. He was quoted saying, “They want the laptops and computers, they are saying they need some meta data of the emails when we are saying we have sent the emails from our email ID, so there is no doubt about it. They are saying they have to take all the computers for this.”

With this latest search, Mehmood Pracha has moved a Delhi court asserting that the purpose of obtaining the search warrant from the court was to yet again threaten, intimidate and frighten him, reported Bar & Bench. His application reads,“It is pertinent to note that yet again, as the previous occasion, the IO has approached this Hon’ble Court directly without even seeking any documents etc. or record from the Accused/Applicant under section 91 CrPC.”

According to a report in Bar & Bench, he assured the court that he would provide specific documents like emails, complaints etc, sought by the investigation agency, and also re-furnish whatever was taken during the previous raid. His plea states, “Although an actually free and fair investigation would reveal the real truth that the present case is completely baseless and has been instituted with the sole objective of hounding the Applicant/Accused at the behest of and as a part of a conspiracy involving senior politicians, bureaucrats and even judicial officers. …as has been previously been submitted during the hearings in this matter, the applicant is going to the extent of risking self-implication even in derogation of his Fundamental Right only for the sake of protecting the data and information pertaining to his clients and briefs (completely unconnected to the allegations being investigated) which is his bounden duty as an advocate, under the law of the land.” 

The matter is reportedly to be taken up on March 11 by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Court.

On December 24, 2020, Pracha had stated that the raid started from noon (12 PM) and continued till 3 AM in the morning on December 25. Thereafter, he had moved the court seeking preservation of copies of the video footage of the raids conducted by Delhi police in his office that was granted by the Magisterial court.

Related:

Adv Mehmood Pracha’s Office raid: Court summons IO for video footage

Jurists, advocates condemn Delhi Police raid on Advocate Mahmood Pracha

The post Advocate Mehmood Pracha’s office raided again! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Even after invading the private chambers and seizing all important gadgets and papers that protect information not meant to be in the public domain, the police haven’t stopped the harassment of Advocate Mehmood Pracha.

On Monday, December 28, Mehmood Pracha was questioned by the Police for allegedly violating social distancing norms during a protest outside the Pakistan High Commission in October.

Pracha who represents several accused persons in the Delhi riots told Hindustan Times, “I told them that they should be happy that I protested against the ill treatment of minorities in Pakistan. The police officers who questioned me for over one and a half hours said that I should stop protesting against Pakistan. It made no sense. I could not make head or tail of what my crime was. It is clear that police are harassing me.”

He continued, “First, my office was raided by the special cell on Thursday (December 24). They then registered a case against me at Hazrat Nizamuddin police station. And today (Monday), they summoned me to Chanakyapuri. It is clearly their way of harassing me for speaking the truth and fighting the riot cases. They did not even give me a copy of the FIR (Chanakyapuri police station case), they have registered against me for protesting.”

After the questioning, Mehmood, who calls himself an Ambedkarite, also tweeted about the experience stating that he is not sacred of authority, despite being questioned and interrogated for one and a half hours.  

“After one half hour of unnecessary harassment I am still not scared. Pls give up on trying to scare an Ambedkarwadi. Manuwadi Mentality can never scare Ambedkarwadis. Take your best shot we will save the Constitution of India at all costs from both inside and outside dangers. Jai Bhim”, read his social media post.

After one half hour of unnecessary harassment I am still not scared. Pl give up on trying to scare an Ambedkarwadi. Manuwadi Mentality can never scare Ambedkarwadis.Take your best shot we will save Constitution of India at all cost from both inside and outside dangers. Jai Bhim https://t.co/Fb9RnvpkD7 pic.twitter.com/GgeSLKTZ7c

— Mehmood Pracha (@MehmoodPracha) December 28, 2020

https://twitter.com/MehmoodPracha/status/1343532451411406848

According to the media, the Police revealed that on October 3, a protest was organised at Teen Murti in Chanakyapuri without police permission. Accordingly, a case under section 188 (Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant) of the Indian Penal Code was registered at the Chanakyapuri police station against Mehmood, who allegedly organised the protest.

Eish Singhal, the Deputy commissioner of police (New Delhi) told HT, “A notice was served to the organiser (Pracha) for recording his statement in the case at the police station.” A police officer associated with the case said Pracha’s statement was recorded on Monday afternoon and stayed in the station for about 15 minutes.

Reacting to the raid, several prominent lawyers, activists have condemned the Delhi Special Cell for conducting a search in his office and not providing the video footage of it to the lawyer. However, the Delhi district court has ordered for the preservation of the footage with a seal of the court. Bar associations, like the Supreme Court Bar Association and Bar Council of Delhi have taken note of the arbitrary, illegal and brazen exercise of brute power by the police and actions taken by them contrary to law.

The victims of the North East Delhi pogrom, most of whom are represented by Pracha, too came out in support of the lawyer revealing personal stories of harassment and intimidation by the Delhi Police at a press conference on December 25.

Related:

Mehmood Pracha’s office raid a “pressure tactic” by Police: Delhi Riot victims

Adv Mehmood Pracha’s Office raid: Court summons IO for video footage

The post Delhi Police question Mehmood Pracha over Anti Pakistan protest appeared first on SabrangIndia.

About ten survivors of the North East Delhi communal violence of February 2020, came out in support of their advocate, Mehmood Pracha, at a press conference in Delhi on December 25, reported The Caravan. Parcha’s office had been raided on December 24 by Delhi Police Special Cell.

Khursheed Saifi and Feroze Akhtar, who survived a near-fatal attack by Hindutva rioters and security personnel at the Farooqia Masjid in the Brijpuri area of North East Delhi’s Mustafabad locality told media persons at the Press Club of India about how the police threatened them to alter their FIR’s to falsely implicate Mehmood Pracha.

Khursheed claimed that he approached Pracha after the police refused to register his complaint. He said he had identified three members of the armed mob by name. “Police would pressurise me; do you know the people who you have named in the complaint,” he asked, alleging that the Police wanted him to change his testimony.

The Caravan further reported that according to Saifi, the police had directly asked him to switch his lawyer and “give a statement that whatever three names are written in your complaint, they are false.” He said that the policemen regularly visited his shop to threaten him, allegedly saying things like: “You didn’t change, we will see you”; “We will get your shop shut”; “Give a false testimony against Pracha and we will leave you or we will implicate you in the riots”; “We will kill you.”

Feroze Akhtar, who also shared his dilemma about State excesses and arbitrary treatment by the Police, said that he felt compelled to shift houses to avoid harassment. He alleged that the Police did not even spare his family as they were subjected by random attacks, including an incident where his son was beaten up by unknown people. He also recalled an incident where he was pushed from his two-wheeler asking him to not pursue his case.

He also received a call from the Police Station where the caller asked, “If you are fighting the case, should we get your lawyer changed? We will give you a lawyer. Which statements have you given that Mehmoodji has made you write?” When Feroze said that it was his statement, the caller responded, “At least some lines must have been narrated by Mehmood bhai?”

Feroze Akhtar reiterated that the statements were his own, at which point the caller pointed out that he was handicapped, did not own a house and had been treated in a private hospital. Then, the caller asked, “If we help you a bit, would you be willing to add something in your FIR?”  

Mohammad Saleem, another violence survivor and Mehmood’s client said that the Police had asked him to falsely place on record that Pracha had forced them into giving statements that were not true. He said the police harassment had scared him so much that he was afraid of going back home.

At the conference, Mohammad Mumtaz said the Delhi police had told him that his FIR would not be registered with names of the assailants even though he could identify them. Mumtaz said the police told him, “You get a simple FIR registered if you want, or go home”. He had approached Pracha when he heard that he was fighting cases free of cost for poor people. Mumtaz’s uncle, Mehboob Alam Sahib was falsely implicated in a case and locked up in Mandoli jail where he was severely tortured. He shared the similar plight of being harassed and pressured to withdraw his case.

The Caravan also reported on the youngest client Wasim present at the conference whose video showing policemen beating five injured men and ordering them to sing the national anthem went viral. “Policemen keep telling us to take the cases back, you will be picked up, killed on the way somewhere,” Wasim said. “Policemen keep pressuring us. What happened yesterday, he is fighting for us, we stand with him. Policemen say this only, ‘The person you are going to … He will also be trapped, so will you and you will be shot down.”

Since the raid on December 24, several lawyers, activists have condemned the attack. On December 26, the Delhi High Court Women Lawyers Forum wrote a letter to the President of the Delhi High Court Bar Association, Mohit Mathur, stating that the lawyers associated with the forum discouraged the investigative agencies from arraigning lawyers as accused in criminal cases, merely for intimidating them.

According to LiveLaw, the letter claimed that lawyers are being targeted by these investigating agencies and even though, “on the face of it, the proceedings initiated against such lawyers are ostensibly independent of the matters being handled by them, but the pattern emerging from all such instances, where lawyers are being targeted, is hard to ignore.”

Today, on December 28, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) too, rose to the occasion and condemned the search and seizure conducted in Pracha’s office to lay hold of his computer for information, and also the brutal assault of a lawyer in Etah, Uttar Pradesh by the local police. It also called upon the Delhi Police to immediately forbear, cease and desist from using any information on the devices that have been seized.

The SCBA said that, “such a search/seizure is in the teeth of the specific provisions of law which recognise the client lawyer relationship and protects all correspondence between the advocate and his client. This encroachment on the rights of an advocate by the police violates the rights of the accused to a fair trial guaranteed under Article 21, and the protection against self-incrimination guaranteed under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India jeopardising the rights of the client to a free trial.”

Supreme Court Bar Association condemns the Delhi Police raid in the office of Advocate Mehmood Pracha and the police assault on advocate in Etah in UP.
“Seizure of confidential information protected by lawyer-client privilege prejudicially affects rights of accused” – SCBA pic.twitter.com/kL3w0WNpy0

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) December 28, 2020

Advocate Pracha has moved two applications before the Delhi district court seeking a copy of the video footage of the search and seizure process, and for a registration of an FIR against police officials whom he accused of threatening him. Pracha stated in his application that the police ought to have returned to the court immediately upon the execution of the search warrant with the seized articles, but did not do so, which prompted him to file the application for the preservation of the video footage. The court directed the police to file a reply to his application for the video footage by December 27 and to file a status report in the concerned case by January 5, 2021.

On December 27, Metropolitan Magistrate Udbhav Kumar Jain of the Patiala House Court directed the entire video footage of the search carried out two days ago by the Delhi Police at the office of Advocate Mehmood Pracha to be preserved with the seal of the court.

@DelhiPolice will never let the entire video recordings come in Public domain. Today’s court order clearly establishes this. https://t.co/arCs7tblRR pic.twitter.com/YAAeSHhVjF

— Mehmood Pracha (@MehmoodPracha) December 27, 2020

Related:

Adv Mehmood Pracha’s Office raid: Court summons IO for video footage

The post Mehmood Pracha’s office raid a “pressure tactic” by Police: Delhi Riot victims appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a collapse of rule of law, Advocate Mehmood Pracha’s office was raided by the Delhi Police on December 24. After condemning this intrusion, Pracha moved the Patiala House court in Delhi on December 25, seeking preservation of the video footage recorded during the raids and continuous monitoring of the case.

The Metropolitan Magistrate, Anshul Singhal directed the Investigating Officer (IO) to file a reply to Mehmood Pracha’s application of preservation of the footage by December 27 and was also asked to remain present in court during the upcoming hearing. Further, the IO was asked to file a status report and place it before the court on January 5, next year.   

Mehmood Pracha stated in his application that the entire search was video recorded by the Police and that “he is entitled to a copy of video footage” as well. The Advocate also stated that the search was conducted at his office from noon (12pm) which continued till 3am in the morning on December 25.

He submitted before the Patiala Court that under Section 165(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that provides that in the event of a search by a police officer, copies of any record made shall forthwith be sent to the nearest Magistrate and the owner or occupier of the place searched shall, on application, be furnished with a copy of the same by the Magistrate, the process had not been followed. Hence the application.

In another shocking revelation, the Advocate has also stated in his application that one Mr. Rajiv and the Investigating Officer had threatened to make a frivolous case against him, hence he moved the court under section 156(3) of the CrPC requesting for continuous monitoring of the case.

Office of advocate Mehmood Pracha was raided by Delhi Police as per a search warrant issued Dec 22. Associates saying that police are attempting to seize materials, & an application seeking clarification from DP of the warrant has been filed by them at the CMM court. pic.twitter.com/3yphR3Zm19

— Ananya Tiwari (@Ananyati) December 24, 2020

According to media reports, the search warrant against Pracha, issued by a local Delhi court, on December 22, against FIR 212/2020 read: “It has been made to appear to me that incriminating documents comprising false complaint and meta-data of outbox of email account which was used to send incriminating documents are essential to the investigation of FIR No. 212/20 of Police station special cell, New Delhi… This is to authorize and require the investigating officer of this case to search for the said incriminating documents and meta-data of outbox of email ID, wherever they may be found whether in computer or in the office/premises of Shri Mehmood Pracha.” 

Noted Public Interest Lawyer and activist Prashant Bhushan condemned the search conducted by the Delhi Police special cell in Pracha’s office on Twitter stating, “First they came for activists; then they came for students; then they came for farmers; now they are coming for their lawyers; Next, they will come for you. Will you call this a Democracy?”

First they came for activists; then they came for students; then they came for farmers; now they are coming for their lawyers; Next, they will come for you.
Will you call this a Democracy?
We will all have to fight this together. https://t.co/ZggkHS3uyk

— Prashant Bhushan (@pbhushan1) December 24, 2020

Senior Supreme Court lawyer Indira Jaising remarked that this was a direct attack on the fundamental right to legal representation, in light of the Delhi Riots alleged accused who are being represented by Mehmood, and appealed all lawyers to condemn this shameful display of State excesses.   

Rahul Mehra, the standing counsel of the Delhi Government, condemned the raid and said, “I may have professional differences with Mr. Mahmood Pracha and may agree to disagree with him most of the time but for an office of a lawyer to be raided like this is highly condemnable. Expecting good sense to prevail sooner rather than later”.

I may have professional differences with Mr. Mahmood Pracha and may agree to disagree with him most of the time but for an office of a lawyer to be raided like this is highly condemnable.
Expecting good sense to prevail sooner rather than later.

— Rahul Mehra (@TheRahulMehra) December 24, 2020

Supreme Court lawyer Karuna Nundy too, took to Twitter stating that the seizure of his computer for emails could disclose information that is protected by Attorney Client privilege, striking at the heart of rule of law.

Mr. Pracha has served as a defence counsel for several accused in the Delhi Riots case of February 2020, including student activist Gulfisha Khatoon.

The order may be read here:

Related:

Delhi riots: Activist Gulfisha Fatima gets bail, but will remain in jail under UAPA

Delhi Court dismisses plea of Gulfisha Fatima and 2 others booked under UAPA seeking statutory bail

The post Adv Mehmood Pracha’s Office raid: Court summons IO for video footage appeared first on SabrangIndia.