By PTI
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday granted interim safety from any coercive motion to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) National Executive member and its Mumbai unit president Preeti Sharma Menon and one other celebration employee in reference to a case filed in opposition to them beneath the stringent SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
A division bench of Justices S B Shukre and Miling Sathaye additionally stayed an investigation into the case for 4 weeks.
The bench was listening to a petition filed by Menon and her celebration colleague Manu Pillai looking for to quash the FIR (first info report) registered in opposition to them.
The FIR was lodged on March 16, 2023, on the Andheri police station in suburban Mumbai on a criticism from AAP member Sanjay Kamble.
According to the complainant, who joined the AAP final yr, on February 24 when the celebration’s nationwide convenor and Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal was in Mumbai alongside together with his Punjab counterpart Bhagwant Mann, he (Kamble) raised a problem of mismanagement at a gathering.
At that point Pillai allegedly made casteist feedback, he stated.
Following this, Kamble requested Menon to take motion in opposition to her celebration colleague, as per the criticism.
Later, on March 10, one other assembly was held at AAP’s Andheri workplace to debate some organisational points.
However, when Kamble spoke on the assembly, Menon is alleged to have stated that his “mentality was low”, whereas Pillai assaulted him (the complainant).
Kamble was allegedly not allowed to depart the celebration workplace, the place numerous sloganeering befell.
Based on the criticism, Menon and Pillai had been booked beneath sections 143 (illegal meeting), 147 (rioting), 500 (defamation), 504 (intentional insult) and 506 (legal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) together with related provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Menon, in her plea within the HC, has denied all the costs and claimed the FIR was lodged beneath the affect of rival political events.
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday granted interim safety from any coercive motion to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) National Executive member and its Mumbai unit president Preeti Sharma Menon and one other celebration employee in reference to a case filed in opposition to them beneath the stringent SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
A division bench of Justices S B Shukre and Miling Sathaye additionally stayed an investigation into the case for 4 weeks.
The bench was listening to a petition filed by Menon and her celebration colleague Manu Pillai looking for to quash the FIR (first info report) registered in opposition to them.googletag.cmd.push(operate() googletag.show(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); );
The FIR was lodged on March 16, 2023, on the Andheri police station in suburban Mumbai on a criticism from AAP member Sanjay Kamble.
According to the complainant, who joined the AAP final yr, on February 24 when the celebration’s nationwide convenor and Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal was in Mumbai alongside together with his Punjab counterpart Bhagwant Mann, he (Kamble) raised a problem of mismanagement at a gathering.
At that point Pillai allegedly made casteist feedback, he stated.
Following this, Kamble requested Menon to take motion in opposition to her celebration colleague, as per the criticism.
Later, on March 10, one other assembly was held at AAP’s Andheri workplace to debate some organisational points.
However, when Kamble spoke on the assembly, Menon is alleged to have stated that his “mentality was low”, whereas Pillai assaulted him (the complainant).
Kamble was allegedly not allowed to depart the celebration workplace, the place numerous sloganeering befell.
Based on the criticism, Menon and Pillai had been booked beneath sections 143 (illegal meeting), 147 (rioting), 500 (defamation), 504 (intentional insult) and 506 (legal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) together with related provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Menon, in her plea within the HC, has denied all the costs and claimed the FIR was lodged beneath the affect of rival political events.
