Tweet
The Delhi Police on Friday told the Supreme Court that the midnight crackdown on Baba Ramdev-led camp at Ramlila Maidan was never intended and blamed the yoga guru for inciting a crisis.
The response followed critical questions posed by the court monitoring the events as it unfolded on the night of June 4, 2011 where the police action was questioned on two grounds — whether the act of the police to evict persons who were asleep a little after midnight was justified and whether the use of force was excessive.
In reply, senior advocate Harish Salve who represented the Delhi Police said, “Before addressing the question about the so-called midnight action even if lawful, whether it was excessive, we need to determine whose midnight action was it - of police or of Ramdev.”
Putting the onus on the yoga guru, Salve informed a bench of Justices BS Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar, “The police were not there that night to remove people.” Adding further, he said, “We said (to Ramdev) tell your people to leave. He jumped into the crowd and made a speech that incited people. If there was a crisis in the midnight he was responsible for it.”
Even the reports of police brutality that resulted in the death of a woman Rajbala was denied by Salve. The counsel explained, “The media reports have suggested police brutality. Our case is they are not.” By stating so, Salve hit out against Ramdev’s counsel senior advocate Ram Jethmalani who brought to the notice of the Court log books of the police control room suggesting not everything was peaceful at the venue that night.
On Jethmalani’s allegation that the police acted at the behest of their political masters as evident from the call records of Union Home Secretary and Commissioner of Police, Salve said that no “malafide” can be drawn from this fact alone as the venue being Ramlila grounds was a cause of worry for the Central leadership. “There are times when controlling of a mob becomes a political action more than a police action.”
Salve cited the example of the civil unrest in Egypt to suggest so and went on to illustrate how in the aftermath of Babri Masjid demolition, the Centre was asked to ensure security and not the UP government or the paramilitary forces operating in the area. Suggesting then that instructions from the executive leadership was inevitable, Salve said, “This matter must lay down parameters as there has to be an interface between police and executive while dealing with public order.” Arguments would continue on Monday.
The response followed critical questions posed by the court monitoring the events as it unfolded on the night of June 4, 2011 where the police action was questioned on two grounds — whether the act of the police to evict persons who were asleep a little after midnight was justified and whether the use of force was excessive.
In reply, senior advocate Harish Salve who represented the Delhi Police said, “Before addressing the question about the so-called midnight action even if lawful, whether it was excessive, we need to determine whose midnight action was it - of police or of Ramdev.”
Putting the onus on the yoga guru, Salve informed a bench of Justices BS Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar, “The police were not there that night to remove people.” Adding further, he said, “We said (to Ramdev) tell your people to leave. He jumped into the crowd and made a speech that incited people. If there was a crisis in the midnight he was responsible for it.”
Even the reports of police brutality that resulted in the death of a woman Rajbala was denied by Salve. The counsel explained, “The media reports have suggested police brutality. Our case is they are not.” By stating so, Salve hit out against Ramdev’s counsel senior advocate Ram Jethmalani who brought to the notice of the Court log books of the police control room suggesting not everything was peaceful at the venue that night.
On Jethmalani’s allegation that the police acted at the behest of their political masters as evident from the call records of Union Home Secretary and Commissioner of Police, Salve said that no “malafide” can be drawn from this fact alone as the venue being Ramlila grounds was a cause of worry for the Central leadership. “There are times when controlling of a mob becomes a political action more than a police action.”
Salve cited the example of the civil unrest in Egypt to suggest so and went on to illustrate how in the aftermath of Babri Masjid demolition, the Centre was asked to ensure security and not the UP government or the paramilitary forces operating in the area. Suggesting then that instructions from the executive leadership was inevitable, Salve said, “This matter must lay down parameters as there has to be an interface between police and executive while dealing with public order.” Arguments would continue on Monday.
