[Attack on Advocates] Delhi High Court Grants 2-weeks to Delhi Police to Respond

Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

The court was hearing a suo-moto petition in a case pertaining to attacks on lawyers of the High Court in 2018.

The Delhi High Court, on Friday, allowed the Delhi Police to respond within two weeks in a case related to the attacks on lawyers of the High Court in 2018.

A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad, was hearing a suo-moto petition pertaining to incidents of the 2018 attacks on lawyers, wherein two vehicles parked in the courtyard of Advocate Ravi Sharma’s residence were deliberately burnt on January 3 and 4, 2018. Thereafter, a similar incident took place at the residences of Senior Advocate Kirti Uppal, President of the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA), and Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa Designated Senior Member Executive of the DHCBA.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Kirti Uppal submitted that it has been four years and  and that she is waiting for something to happen, Senior Advocate, Vikas Pahwa was attacked and her cars were torched.

Counsel appearing for Delhi police sought some time to respond and address the issue.

As per the Bar resolution of January 24, 2018, the Executive Committee of the DHCBA noted as follows:

“It was revealed that the said incident was not an accident but a pre-meditated and deliberate attacks on the legal community. It is pertinent to mention that even Sh. Ravi Sharma, Advocate was supporting the cause of the colleague lady advocate on whose behalf Mr. Kirti Uppal & Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Sr. Advocates were appearing.”

“The present situation is an extraordinary in nature in as much as these heinous acts have been executed with the intention to overawe and strike terror in our community by using inflammable substances, in a manner so as to cause injuries or loss of life and damage/ destruction of property, in order to terrorize the Advocates to refrain from performing their professional duties.”

“Inspite of registration of three FIRs by the lawyers and personal meeting of the members of the Committee with the Police at the highest level apprising them about the nexus and adequate and proper attention is not being given to the matter and their approach lackadaisical and deliberately protracting.”

Case Title: Court in its own motion v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi