Hardik Patel: Case to be heard by different Bench after 45-mins of arguments by Kapil Sibal

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for Hardik Patel in his petition in the Supreme Court. Patel had approached the apex court after the Gujarat High Court refused to quash the sedition charges pressed against him for his statement to one Vipul Desai urging him to kill policemen instead of committing suicide..A Bench of V Gopala Gowda and Justice Amitava Roy JJ. heard Sibal for forty-five minutes this afternoon before deciding that the case should be heard by another Bench..The exact reason for this is unclear at this point of time..In his petition a copy of which is with Bar & Bench, Patel has contended that the FIR registered against him was done with political motives. The FIR was meant to blunt the movement for securing reservation benefits for the Patel community, a movement headed by Patel..As per the petition,.“[The] present FIR is nothing but an attempt to subvert the Petitioner from exercising his democratic right to create public opinion. The Petitioner submits that the FIR is therefore nothing but an attempt by the State to subvert a democratic process, which the state was finding difficult for political reasons. The Objective of the FIR is therefore malafide which smells of political vendetta and hence ought to have been quashed in totality by the Hon’ble High Court in exercise of powers under section 482 of the Criminal procedure Code.”.The petitioner has further contended that no statement, as alleged, was made to Vipul Desai (to kill policemen) and even if it is assumed that such a statement was made, the statement was not a public statement but was a private statement made to a person concerned and hence would not attract penal provisions..“….even if it is assumed that the statement imputed against the Petitioner was made to Shri Vipul Desai, the statement was not a public statement but was a private statement made to a person concerned. .He has not proceeded or acted in furtherance of the so called “advise” and none other has also done so. It is thus stated that since offence was committed, mere making a statement to person at his residence cannot be a basis for invoke provisions of section 124A of the Act…..Section 124-A can be leveled against the person who creates hatrated, contempt or disaffection towards the Government. There is difference between the Government and the ruling party of the Government. The demand of the patidar community is by following democratic processes and which cannot be curtailed by misusing the process of law.”.As interim relief, the petitioner has prayed for stay on further investigation and proceedings in the case and for release of the petitioner from custody..Sibal had argued that Hardik’s remarks to another person will not amount to sedition..“He is not addressing the public. He is not doing anything against the State. He makes a statement to one Vipul Desai. He then goes out and nothing happens.”.The court after hearing Sibal for 45 minutes decided that the matter will be heard by another Bench. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi and Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta were also present for the hearing.