Preet Singh | SabrangIndia

Jantar Mantar hate speech case: Delhi HC grants bail to accused Preet Singh

Fri, 24 Sep 2021 11:58:37 +0000

Image Courtesy:indiatvnews.com

Justice Mukta Gupta granted bail to Preet Singh, who allegedly raised inflammatory and anti-Muslim slogans at Jantar Mantar, on August 8. The court noted that he was not needed for custodial interrogation any longer and could be released on bail.

Without indulging in the issue of whether or not Singh was involved in hate speech, the court noted in its order that as per the video footage and the call records of Singh, he had left the spot at around 2:00 P.M., whereafter the main provocative words/slogans were shouted by the co-accused at around 4:00 P.M.

During the bail hearing, Preet’s lawyer Vishnu Shankar Jain, had argued that if the demand for a Hindu Rashtra (Hindu nation) comes within the ambit of hate speech laws that intend to hurt the sentiments of a particular community, he will not press the bail application.

Tarang Srivastava, the Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the state, had opposed the bail application stating that Preet Singh was a co-organiser of the event and is thus responsible for the incitement which continued till the evening. He pointed out that even in an interview given by Singh along with co-accused Pinki Chaudhary, he used inciting words against the Muslim community.

To this argument, the high court said, “the interview by the petitioner was not an isolated interview and was part of simultaneous conversation with a number of speakers. Further large numbers of people gathered at the spot due to the petitioner co-organizing the protest and therefore the petitioner would be liable for any offence committed in furtherance of the common object of the assembly.”

However, Justice Gupta relied on his call records to observe that Preet had already left the spot before the Islamophobic sloganeering started.

On August 27, the district court refused to grant him bail on grounds that prima facie, there was material to believe that there had been active participation by Preet in his individual capacity and also as the main organizer of the Jantar Mantar event in spite of the denial of permission by the Delhi Police and total disregard to Covid-19 protocol issued by the government.

Additional Sessions Judge Anil Antil of the Patiala House court had said, “Given the stature of the applicant, it was expected that he ought to have exercised his authority, in these circumstances, and prevented participants from erring such inflammatory opinions in the larger interest of the public/Committee welfare. On the other hand, the applicant is clearly seen actively participating in the incendiary speeches along with his other associates.”

Before this, on August 12, the Metropolitan Magistrate, Udbhav Kumar Jain, had observed that accused persons Deepak Singh and Preet Singh were seen together making “scathing remarks which are undemocratic and uncalled for from a citizen of this country where principles like Secularism hold the value of basic feature imbibed in the Constitution.” The MM had also rejected his bail plea.

On August 8, vile slogans like Mu*** (slang term for Muslims) kaate jaaenge, Ram Ram chilaenge” (Muslims will be slaughtered in the name of Lord Ram), “s**r kaate jaaenge, Ram Ram chilaenge” (Pigs will be slaughtered in the name of Lord Ram), and “Hindustan mein rehna hoga, Jai Shri Ram kehna hoga” (If you want to live in India, one must say long live Lord Ram) were raised by a group of people.

After the Delhi Police registered an FIR, 6 people, including supreme court lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay, were arrested on August 10. As per a SabrangIndia report, the next day, on August 11, Magistrate Udbhav Kumar Jain had granted relief to Upadhyay, while saying, “Except for a mere assertion there was nothing on record to show that the alleged hate speech to promote enmity between different groups was done in the presence or at the behest of the applicant/accused.”

Other people booked and arrested for this event are Deepak Singh, Vinod Sharma and Pinky Chaudhary. While dismissing Chaudhary’s bail plea, Additional Sessions Judge, Anil Antil, had said, “applicant’s interview is impregnated with high octane communal barbs, laced with inflammatory, insulting and threatening gestures, ex facie indicative of the calculative design on the part of the applicant to promote hatred and ill will amongst other section of the community”.

The HC order may be read here:

The post Jantar Mantar hate speech case: Delhi HC grants bail to accused Preet Singh appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Preet Singh involved in incendiary speech: Delhi court denies bail

Sat, 28 Aug 2021 10:18:58 +0000

Additional Sessions Judge Anil Antil of the Patiala House court has denied regular bail to accused Preet Singh who allegedly raised inflammatory and anti-Muslim slogans at Jantar Mantar, on August 8. The court observed that he could be seen “actively participating in the incendiary speeches along with his other associates.”

Earlier on August 12, Preet Singh, along with co accused – Vinod Sharma and Deepak Singh – were denied bail by the Metropolitan Magistrate Udbhav Kumar Jain. They had filed an application under section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (bail in cases of non bailable offence). As previously reported by SabrangIndia, MM Jain watched the video footage of the sloganeering, and observed that accused Deepak Singh and Preet Singh were seen together making “scathing remarks which are undemocratic and uncalled for from a citizen of this country where principles like Secularism hold the value of basic feature imbibed in the Constitution.”

In the present application filed under section 439 of CrPC (special powers of High court and sessions court for grant of bail), ASJ Anil observed, “Prime facie on the basis of the material placed on record and the submissions put forth by the prosecution, it is observed that there has been active participation by the applicant in his individual capacity and also as the main organizer of the event itself which was conducted at Jantar Mantar in spite of the denial of permission by the Delhi Police and total disregard to Covid19 protocol issued by the Govt. of India.”

After perusing the audio and video evidence against Preet Singh, the court observed that the key attendees of the protest and others seemed to have been invited by him. ASJ Anil said, “Given the stature of the applicant, it was expected that he ought to have exercised his authority, in these circumstances, and prevented participants from erring such inflammatory opinions in the larger interest of the public/Committee welfare. On the other hand, the applicant is clearly seen actively participating in the incendiary speeches along with his other associates.”

The court further held that even though the right to assemble and freedom to air once thoughts are cherished by the Constitution, they are “not absolute”, and they are to be exercised “with inherent reasonable restrictions”. He further held, “the applicant (Preet) not only voluntarily organised the event but also actively participated and provided support to the views and contents of the inflammatory speeches, which were being made by the participants/accused persons at that time, by acknowledging and endorsing via gestures and clapping intermittently”.

The event the court referred to was the August 8 protest, organized at Jantar Mantar to demand for some legislations before the government as part of the “Bharat Jodo Movement” against colonial-era laws in the country.

The court further noted that on prima facie analysis of the inflammatory and incendiary content of the speeches delivered during the event, especially the comments pertaining to express pejorative references to a religious community, and also keeping in mind that Preet Singh was an active organiser of the event, “he cannot later absolve himself of the responsibility of the content or consequences arising therefrom.”

Furthermore, ASJ Anil observed that many accused persons in this case are absconding and evading the law. Since the entire incriminating material is yet to be recovered, the court said, “…in backdrop of the fact that the applicant was an active main organiser of the event, an influential personality and there is possibility of him interfering in the investigation and/or influencing the witnesses of the case”. Accordingly, his bail plea was dismissed.

Co-accused Pinky Chaudhary alias Bhupendar Tomar, Hindu Raksha Dal President, was denied anticipatory bail by ASJ Anil on August 21. He observed that Tomar’s interview is “impregnated with high octane communal barbs, laced with inflammatory, insulting and threatening gestures, ex facie indicative of the calculative design on the part of the applicant to promote hatred and ill will amongst other sections of the community”.

As we had previously reported in SabrangIndia, the court further said, “We are not a Taliban state. Rule of law is the sacrosanct governing principle in our plural and multi-cultural society. While the whole of India is celebrating Azadi ka Amrut Mahotsav, there are some minds still chained with intolerant and self-centric beliefs”.

The order may be read here:

Delhi Court rejects bail pleas of three accused in the anti-Muslim sloganeering in Jantar Mantar rally

Jantar Mantar rally: BJP leader, SC lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay among six arrested

The post Preet Singh involved in incendiary speech: Delhi court denies bail appeared first on SabrangIndia.