Delhi High Court on Friday refused to entertain a public interest litigation to stop the "media trial" against wrestler Sushil Kumar who has been arrested in a murder case. (Srikant Prasad vs UOI & Ors).Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh opined that Sushil Kumar was a "vigilant man" and no PIL could be entertained on his behalf. ."You can't file a PIL. Let that man come.", the Court said. .Observing that Sushil Kumar was free to take the recorse available to him in law, the Court ordered, "All these contentions are raised for Sushil Kumar and as per party-in-person there is defamation.. PIL has been preferred for a person who is a vigilant man. We see no reason to entertain.".Petitioners before the Court were law student Srikant Prasad and Kamla Devi who is Sushil Kumar's mother..As per the petitioners, due to the ongoing media trial, Kumar's career, achievement, rewards ,medals and the honour was being diminished and even after an acquittal, "he would be not left with anything". .Subversion of the criminal justice system through media trial would be in derogation of the rule of law and would also impinge upon the protection granted to an accused under Article 21 of the Constitution, it was said. .In-person petitioner, Srikant Prasad told the Court that the entire case was set up with a malafide intention to sabotage Sushil Kumar's career.."Media is using Article 19 as misuse by creating false and frivolous heading. In every high profile cases, media has decided them criminal before the court.", he contended. .As per the prosecution's case, Sushil Kumar and other accused took one deceased Sonu to Chhatarsal Stadium at gun point, and beat him up mercilessly. .It is claimed that in the CCTV footage, Sushil Kumar was seen beating the deceased with a stick..Sushil Kumar's anticipatory bail was rejected by Delhi Court earlier this month. He was, thereafter, arrested by the Delhi Police and sent to 6-day police custody.
Delhi High Court on Friday refused to entertain a public interest litigation to stop the "media trial" against wrestler Sushil Kumar who has been arrested in a murder case. (Srikant Prasad vs UOI & Ors).Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh opined that Sushil Kumar was a "vigilant man" and no PIL could be entertained on his behalf. ."You can't file a PIL. Let that man come.", the Court said. .Observing that Sushil Kumar was free to take the recorse available to him in law, the Court ordered, "All these contentions are raised for Sushil Kumar and as per party-in-person there is defamation.. PIL has been preferred for a person who is a vigilant man. We see no reason to entertain.".Petitioners before the Court were law student Srikant Prasad and Kamla Devi who is Sushil Kumar's mother..As per the petitioners, due to the ongoing media trial, Kumar's career, achievement, rewards ,medals and the honour was being diminished and even after an acquittal, "he would be not left with anything". .Subversion of the criminal justice system through media trial would be in derogation of the rule of law and would also impinge upon the protection granted to an accused under Article 21 of the Constitution, it was said. .In-person petitioner, Srikant Prasad told the Court that the entire case was set up with a malafide intention to sabotage Sushil Kumar's career.."Media is using Article 19 as misuse by creating false and frivolous heading. In every high profile cases, media has decided them criminal before the court.", he contended. .As per the prosecution's case, Sushil Kumar and other accused took one deceased Sonu to Chhatarsal Stadium at gun point, and beat him up mercilessly. .It is claimed that in the CCTV footage, Sushil Kumar was seen beating the deceased with a stick..Sushil Kumar's anticipatory bail was rejected by Delhi Court earlier this month. He was, thereafter, arrested by the Delhi Police and sent to 6-day police custody.