Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court on Friday stayed the trial court order directing the Delhi Police to supply a copy of the FIR to accused Neelam Azad in the Parliament security breach case.

While staying the trial court order, the bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma issued notice to the accused and scheduled the matter for hearing on January 4, 2024. 

During the hearing, the counsel for the Delhi Police submitted that, as per law and the directions passed by the Supreme Court, in sensitive cases, the accused has to first approach the Commissioner of Police, which constitutes a three-member committee to examine whether the FIR is to be supplied or not.

"If the committee decides the FIR cannot be provided, only then can the accused approach the court," he added. 

The matter was mentioned for urgent hearing this morning before a bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna by the counsel for the police.

"We arrested four accused persons. In sensitive matters where we don't provide a copy of the FIR, they have to approach the commissioner. The trial court, however, directed that we supply a copy," the counsel said.

Notably, on December 21, a Delhi court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Hardeep Kaur at Patiala House, directed the Delhi Police to provide accused Neelam Azad with a copy of the First Information Report (FIR) related to the Parliament security breach case. Despite strong opposition from Special Public Prosecutor Akhand Pratap Singh, the court passed the order.

Delhi Police argued that the FIR is sealed due to the sensitive nature of the case and the ongoing investigation, with some accused still at large. Singh emphasized the critical nature of every piece of information at this stage, expressing concerns that any leakage could potentially influence the ongoing investigation.

In response, Neelam Azad's lawyer, Advocate Suresh Kumar Chaudhary, contended that providing the FIR to the accused's family and lawyer is a constitutional right.

Despite the opposition, the court granted Azad's plea for a copy of the FIR. Additionally, Azad's request for the court to direct Delhi Police to allow her to meet with her lawyer was accepted.

ASJ Kaur asserted that Azad is entitled to legal assistance even in police custody and stipulated that she can meet her lawyer every alternate day for 15 minutes.

Neelam Azad, along with three other accused—Sagar Sharma, Manoranjan D, and Amol Shinde—were arrested by Delhi Police on December 13. Sharma and Manoranjan D had entered the Lok Sabha chamber with canisters emitting smoke during a protest outside the parliament building. As their initial custody period ended, the court granted an extension of 15 days to Delhi Police for their remand.

Case Title: State v. Neelam Azad