[BREAKING] "Police was acting to prevent violence:" Delhi Court dismisses plea by Jamia Millia Islamia seeking FIR against Police

A Delhi court has dismissed an application by Jamia Millia Islamia seeking registration of FIR against police for committing various atrocities in the university campus following protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in December 2019 (Jamia Millia Islamia vs State). .Metropolitan Magistrate Rajat Goyal, Saket courts opined that no direction for registration of FIR could be issued in the present case in the absence of sanction for prosecution under section 197 CrPC..In its application before the Court, Jamia Millia Islamia (Applicant) stated that on December 15, 2019, civil society members had decided to call a peaceful protest against CAA near the university area. .However, in pursuit of clearing the crowd, police officials broke into the university campus without seeking any sanction and used excessive and arbitrary force, thrashed several security guards as well as students. .It was also alleged that the police officials caused destruction of university property, fired tear gas shells and conducted lathi charge. .The Court was also informed that the police hurt religious sentiments of locals of the area by entering into the university mosque..The Applicant claimed that a complaint in this regard was made to the Jamia Nagar Police Station but no action was taken. .In response to the application, Delhi Police stated that the police was constrained to enter the university campus to maintain the law and order situation. .Police claimed that local leaders and politicians had instigated the students and deployment of anti-riot staff was done as per the standard protocol to deal with the crowd that was armed and had set several vehicles on fire..Two FIRs were registered in this regard against the miscreants, it was added. .The Court noted that there was no dispute that all the allegations were being levelled against "serving police officials" who qualified as "public servants" under section 21 IPC..The Court observed that although not every offence committed by a public servant required sanction for prosecution under section 197 CrPC, the present case was not one of those. ."In the instant case, it is an undisputed fact that all the respondents were acting in order to control law and order situation which had emerged in relation to the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. It is also an undisputed fact that many students of applicant University were also protesting against the same and participating in what has been popularly referred to as “anti-CAA Protests”", it noted. .The Court further added that it was clear that some of the protests had become violent and that police, including the respondents, were acting to control the said protests at the relevant point of time, so as to prevent violence and prevent law and order situation from further deteriorating.."Though it could be argued that while so acting, the police/ respondents had allegedly exceeded their jurisdiction and used more force than necessary in some instances, it cannot be said, by any stretch of imagination, that the said acts allegedly committed by the respondents were wholly unconnected to their official duty," the order said. .The alleged lack of restraint exhibited by the police/ respondents and excesses committed in trying to control the situation are very much related to official duties of the police and fell within the purview of section 197 CrPC, the Court opined. .Relying on Anil Kumar v MK Aiyappa, the Court concluded that the requirement of prosecution sanction was present even at the stage of consideration of an application for registration of FIR under section 156(3) CrPC..Since the same was absent in the present case, the application was dismissed by the Court..[Read Order]