Delhi High Court
Court On Its Own Motion vs Union Of India & Ors. on 6 November, 2019
$~42
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 11652/2019
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION ..... Petitioner
Through: Court on its own motion
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through:
Ms. Maninder Acharya, ASG with Mr.Anil
Soni, CGSCs for UOI along with
Mr.Shreeshail Malge, Director, Ministry of
Home Affairs
Mr. K.M.Nataraj, ASG with Mr. Anurag
Ahluwalia, Mr. Anmol Chandan and Mr.
Abhigyan Siddhant, Advs. for Delhi Police
Mr.Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel, Adv.
Mr.Chaitanya Gosain, Mr. Tushar Sannu,
Mr.Amarpreet Singh, Mr.Anand Thanbayil,
and Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Advs. for respondent
nos. 2 and 3
Mr. Manan Kumar Misra, Sr. Advocate,
Chairman, Bar Council of India (BCI) along
with Mr. S. Prabhakaran, Sr. Advocate, Co-
Chairman, BCI, Mr.Ved Prakash Sharma,
Co-Chairman, BCI, and Mr. Ram Shankar,
Standing Counsel for BCI.
Mr. K.C. Mittal, Advocate, Chairman, Bar
Council of Delhi (BCD), Ms. Suman Rani,
Advs. with Mr. Sanjay Rathi, Adv. and Co-
Chairman for BCD, Mr.Piyush Sharma,
Advocate and Co-Chairman, BCD; Mr.D.K.
W.P.(C) 11652/2019 Page 1 of 10
Sharma, Advocate and Co-Chairman, BCD;
Mr.R.K. Kochar, Advocate and Co-
Chairman, BCD; Mr.Sanjay Rathi, Advocate
and Co-Chairman, BCD; Mr.D.K. Singh,
Advocate and Vice Chairman, BCD;
Mr.Surya Prakash Khatri, Advocate and
Member, BCD; Mr.Murari Tiwari, Member,
BCD, Mr.Ajayinder Sangwan, Advocate and
Member, BCD;
Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna, Sr. Adv. and
President, Supreme Court Bar Association
(SCBA), Mr.J.M. Sharma, Advocate and
Vice President, SCBA, Mr. Rishi Kumar,
Mr. Sandeep Lamba and Mr. Yasir, Advs.
SCBA, Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Tanver
Ahmed Khan, Mr. Shoeb Shakil, Advs. and
Mr. Vishwajit Shahi, Adv, SCBA. Mr.
Sanjay Khanna, Sr. Adv. and President,
SCBA, with Mr. Jagjeet K. Sud, Sr. Adv.
and Mr.Saching Gupta, Advs. SCBA
Mr. Vivek Narayan Sharma, Advocate and
Joint Secretary, Supreme Court AOR
Association; Ms. Savita Singh, Advocate
and Member, Supreme Court AOR
Association.
Mr. Mohit Mathur, Sr. Advocate and
President, Delhi High Court Bar Association
(DHCBA); with Mr. Kriti Uppal, Sr. Adv.
Mr. B.S. Dhir, Member Executive, Ms.Kajal
Chandra, Mr. Naginder Benipal, and Mr.
Dhan Mohan, Advs. with Mr.Jatan Singh,
Advocate and Vice President, DHCBA with
Ms. Rupali Kapoor, Adv.; Mr. Abhijat,
Advocate and Secretary, DHCBA with
Mr.Mohit Gupta, Mr. Amit Saxena, Adv.,
Mr. Harshit Jain, Adv. for DHCBA, Mr. P.S.
W.P.(C) 11652/2019 Page 2 of 10
Prakash, Adv. for DHCBA, Mr. Sitab Ali
Chaudhary, Adv., Mr.A.K.Chaurasiya, Adv.
for DHCBA, Mr. B.P.Singh, Mr. G.M.
Akhtar and Mr.Ajay Sharma, Advs. for
DHCBA, Mr.Nikhil Mehta, Adv. and
Member Executive, DHCBA, Mr. Rahul
Dutta, Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Jaiswal and Mr.
Abhishek Gupta, Advs. for DHCBA
Mr. Rajiv Khosla, Mr. Sunil Rai, Mr. Sunil
Sharma, Mr. Amit Sharma and Mr. Surender
Chauhan, Advs. for DBA, Mr.N.C. Gupta,
Advocate and President, Delhi Bar
Association, Tis Hazari (DBA); Mr.Jaivir
Chauhan, Adv. and Hony. Secretary, DBA;
Mr. Ansul Pratap Singh, Advocate,
Mr.Shitez Sharma, Mr.Mohit Rana, Mr.Sahil
Aeron, Mr.Vaibhav Jain, Mr. Robin,
Mr.Prateek Mehta, Mr.Vivek Kumar,
Mr.Ankur Kr. Sharma, Advocates for DBA,
Mr. J.S. Chauhan, Adv. and Secretary with
Mr.Rajender Sharma, Mr. Rachit Sahney
and, Mr. Naveen Gaur, Mr. R.K. Sharma,
Mr. Varunn Sakuja, Advs. DBA
Mr. Karnail Singh, Adv. and President Saket
Court Bar Association with Mr. Dhir Singh
Kasana, Secretary, Saket Court, with
Mr.Deepanshu Joshi, Mr. Himanshu
Vashishth, and Mr. Hemant Mehta, Addl.
Secretary, Saket Court Bar Association
(SCBA), Advs.
Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate and
Secretary, Ch. Rabindra Singh, Mr. R.B.S.
Chauhan and Mr. Pramod Nagar, Mr. Amit
Sinha, Advs. for Shahdara Bar
Association(SBA)
W.P.(C) 11652/2019 Page 3 of 10
Mr.Y.P. Singh, Advocate and President,
Dwarka Court Bar Association (DCBA);
Mr.Rajesh Kaushik, Advocate and Vice
President, DCBA; Mr.Jai Singh Yadav,
Advocate and Hony. Secretary, DCBA, Mr.
Subhash Ahlawat, Adv. and Sr. Member
Executive with Mr. K.K. Chauhan, Adv.
Mr. R.K.Wadhwa, Advocate and President
with Mr. D.S. Khatana, Mr. Nagender
Kumar, Hony. Secretary, New Delhi Bar
Association, Addl. Secretary, Mr. Ravi
Mehta, Mr. Vijay Pratap Singh, Advs. for
NDBA, Mr. Sunil Pandey, Adv. with Mr.
Sandeep Lamba, Mr. S.N. Sharma, Mr.
Naveen Kapila, Mr. Ashok Sharma, Mr.
Jalaj Agarwal, Mr. A. Rana and Mr.
Prashant Saini, Advs. for NDBA
Mr. Mahavir Sharma, Advocate, President,
Rohini Court Bar Association (RCBA) AND
Chairman, Coordination Committee of All
Delhi District Bar Associations with Mr.
Rajbir Malik, Advocate and Vice President,
RCBA Mr. Rakesh Chahar, Advocate and
Secretary, RCBA.
Mr.Siddharth, Advocate and Hony.
Secretary, Rouse Avenue Bar Association
with Mr. Tarun Dubey, Joint Secretary,
Delhi Rouse Avenue Court Bar Association
Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Adv. and Secretary,
Delhi Tax Bar Association
Mr. Honey Jain, Adv. Mr. Prateek Goswami
and Mr. Ojas Mittal, Advs.
Mr.Anupam S. Sharma, SPP-CBI with
W.P.(C) 11652/2019 Page 4 of 10
Mr.Prakash Airan, Mr. Apoorv Bansal and
Mr Pankaj Chaudhary, Advs.
Mr. Pardeep Kumar Saini, Adv. with
Mr.Hemant Kumar, Adv., Mr. Sachin
Gautam, Adv., Mr. Jatin Anand Dwivedi,
Mr. Shubhnan Chaturvedi, Mr. Hemant
Kumar Mathur, Mr. Abhishek Rana,
Mr.Manish Kumar, Mr. Gagan Gupta and
Mr.Ashish P., Advs., Mr. Sanket Gupta,
Adv.with Mr. A.C.P.Gautam, Adv., Mr. Anil
Kumar Verma, Adv. with Mr. Ashu Rani,
Mr. T. Singh and Mr. Tanveer A. Khan,
Advs., Mr. Suraj Kumar and Mr. Gagan
Kumar, Advs. Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.
with Mr. Satish Bhandari, Adv., Mr. B.S.
Bagga and Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advs., Mr.
Vishal Singh, Adv., Mr. Raja Ram Tripathi,
Adv. Mr. Ashish Deep Verma, Mr. Anshul
Pratap Singh, Mr. Upendra K. Nagar, Mr.
Vivek Ojha, Mr. Sanjeev, Mr. Ankur Kumar,
Mr.S.N. Sharma, Mr. Neeraj, Advs., Mr.
Akhilesh Singh and Mr. Nawin Kumar,
Advs.
Mr. Nitesh Mehra, Ms. Angel Bhardwaj,
Ms.S. Bhateja and Ms. Hitaakshi Mehra,
Advs. for non-applicants with non-applicants
in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
ORDER
% 06.11.2019
CM Appl. No. 48283/2019 in W.P.(C) 11652/2019
1. This Civil Miscellaneous Application has been preferred by
Ministry of Home Affairs, Union of India with the following
prayers:
"a) Allow the instant application and clarify
the order dated 03.11.2019 that there is no
impediment in taking any action in
accordance with law to maintain law and
order;
b) Pass any other order(s) which this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the present case."
2. By this application applicant is seeking clarification of the order
passed by this Court dated 3rd November, 2019 in W.P.(C)
11652/2019, especially seeking clarification in paragraph 15(ix).
3. Having heard all the counsels at length and looking to our order
dated 3rd November, 2019, we hereby clarify that the observations
made in para 15(ix) were for FIR Nos. 268/2019 and 269/2019, both
dated 2nd November, 2019.
3. Hence, paragraph 15(ix) will now be read as under:
"(ix) Meanwhile, no coercive action shall be
taken against the Advocates in pursuance of
the F.I.R. Nos. 268/2019 and 269/2019 dated
2nd November, 2019 with regard to the
aforesaid incident filed against Advocates."
4. Thus, we hereby clarify that observations made in para 15(ix)
that no coercive action shall be taken is only in pursuance of FIR Nos.
268/2019 and 269/2019, both dated 2nd November, 2019.
5. With this clarification this civil miscellaneous application is
hereby allowed and disposed of.
CM Appl. No. 48439/2019 in W.P.(C) 11652/2019
1. This Civil Miscellaneous Application has been preferred by
Delhi Police. Looking to the urgency of the matter, the same is taken
up for hearing today. Prayers in this Civil Miscellaneous Application
read as under:
"(a) Pass an order modifying the order
dated 03.11.2019 to exclude the words "One
had opened the firing upon the Advocates
and another had dragged a lawyer into the
lockup room and confined him therein.
Normally lockup room is meant for
prisoners." in Para15(viii) so that the same
cannot be read and interpreted as the
conclusive findings against the officers of
the Delhi Police in question;
(b) Pass an order modifying the Order
"Mr. Harender Kumar Singh had ordered
for firing. Firearm injuries sustained by
Advocates. Mr.Sanjay Singh ordered for
lathicharge upon Advocates. Because of this
order injuries were sustained by Advocates
and also the police had broken window
glasses of Cars parked at the Tis Hazari
Courts Complex and have ransacked the
Chambers of Advocates at Tis Hazari
Courts Complex, New Delhi." in Para 15(x)
so that the same cannot be read and
interpreted as the conclusive findings
against the officers of the Delhi Police in
question;
(c) Pass any Order or any further Orders
as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the
facts and circumstances of the case in the
interest of justice."
2. Having heard all the counsels at length and looking to our order
dated 3rd November, 2019, we hereby clarify that the observations
made in paragraph 15 (viii) of the order dated 3rd November, 2019:-
"One had opened the firing upon Advocates
and another had dragged a lawyer into the
lockup room and confined him therein.
Normally the lockup room is meant for
prisoners."
are prima facie observations, tentative in nature and these
observations are only to be read in the context of the order dated 3rd
November, 2019; otherwise, these facts are to be proved on the basis
of the evidences on record.
3. Similarly, the observations made by this Court in paragraph
15(x) of our order dated 3rd November, 2019, in W.P.(C) 11652/2019:
"Mr. Harender Kumar Singh had ordered
for firing. Firearm injuries sustained by
Advocates. Mr.Sanjay Singh ordered for
lathicharge upon Advocates. Because of this
order injuries were sustained by Advocates
and also the police had broken window
glasses of Cars parked at the Tis Hazari
Courts Complex and have ransacked the
Chambers of Advocates at Tis Hazari
Courts Complex, New Delhi. Further order
will be passed by this Court after receipt of
the inquiry report."
are prima facie observations, tentative in nature and these
observations are only to be read in the context of the order dated 3rd
November, 2019; otherwise, these facts are to be proved on the basis
of the evidences on record.
4. Moreover, we have also clarified, in para 16 of our order dated
3rd November, 2019, that "the inquiry will be completed in accordance
with law and on the basis of the evidences on record, on its own merits
and without being influenced by the order of this Court in this
matter."
5. Before parting with this order, we deem it appropriate to note,
with a sense of anguish, that, in our democratic polity, the Bar and the
Police establishment represent and constitute, as it were, the preserver,
and the protector, of the rule of law. They are but two faces of the
coin of justice, and it is essential, for the rule of law to prevail, that
they work in close proximity and harmony. Any dissonance, or
friction, between them, is deleterious to peace and harmony, and
destructive of public interest, in the long run.
6. In our view, therefore, it would be advisable, in this case, that a
joint meeting, of responsible representatives of the Advocates and the
Police establishment be convened, who should make a sincere effort to
meet and sort out their differences amicably, on the basis of discussion
and deliberations, with the objective of dissolution of their differences,
which, in our view, have essentially arisen owing to a communication
gap, during the last few days. We are hopeful that, if a sincere
attempt is made in this direction, peace and harmony will ultimately
prevail.
7. With this clarification, this civil miscellaneous application is
hereby disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
NOVEMBER 06, 2019
r.bararia
