By PTI
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court said on Thursday a lawyer accused of spreading false particulars about assaults on migrant labourers from Bihar in Tamil Nadu must be “more responsible” and requested him to tender an apology.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Pankaj Mithal was listening to 2 separate pleas filed by advocate Prashant Kumar Umrao, whose verified Twitter take care of says he is a spokesperson for Uttar Pradesh BJP, along with the one tough a scenario imposed on him by the Madras High Court whereas granting anticipatory bail inside the case.
The apex courtroom docket modified the scenario imposed by the extreme courtroom docket which said that Umrao shall report sooner than the police daily at 10.30 am and 5.30 pm for a interval of 15 days and, thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.
The excessive courtroom docket directed that the petitioner shall appear sooner than the investigating officer on April 10 and after that as and when the IO requires his presence.
“What is his standing at the bar?” the bench requested senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, who was displaying for the petitioner.
When Luthra said seven years, the bench seen, “He (petitioner) should be more responsible”.
“Before the next date, you tender an apology,” the bench said.
The apex courtroom docket moreover handed an ad-interim order saying the anticipatory bail granted to him by the extreme courtroom docket might be related in one other FIRs registered in Tamil Nadu with regard to the tweet.
Luthra said the petitioner has filed two petitions along with one in opposition to the scenario imposed by the extreme courtroom docket whereas granting anticipatory bail and the other looking for clubbing of FIRs lodged in opposition to him at completely completely different police stations over the tweet, which he later deleted.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, displaying for the state, said there was no completely different FIR whereby Umrao has been named.
An FIR was lodged in opposition to Umrao beneath quite a few sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with these for provocation with intent to set off a riot, promoting enmity and hatred, scary breach of peace and assertion leading to public mischief, the police had said.
Earlier on March 7, the Delhi High Court had granted transit anticipatory bail to Umrao till March 20 to technique a Chennai courtroom docket in reference to an FIR lodged by the Tamil Nadu Police for allegedly giving false information claiming assaults on migrant workers inside the state.
Later, he approached the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court looking for anticipatory bail.
In its March 21 order, the extreme courtroom docket had well-known that the prosecution’s case is that the petitioner had uploaded false content material materials on his Twitter internet web page claiming 15 Bihar natives had been hanged in a room in Tamil Nadu on account of they’d been speaking in Hindi and 12 of them died.
Umrao’s counsel had argued sooner than the extreme courtroom docket that the alleged tweet was initially exhibited in private info channels and he had merely re-tweeted it.
His counsel moreover said Umrao had deleted the tweet and that he would not assist any discrimination on the thought of religion, race, fatherland or language During the listening to sooner than the apex courtroom docket on Thursday, Luthra suggested the bench that quite a lot of FIRs have been lodged in opposition to Umrao at completely completely different police stations of Tamil Nadu over the tweet.
“They are lodging multiple FIRs at the behest of some political workers and individuals and harassing this young person (Umrao),” he said.
Luthra said the petitioner had solely re-tweeted info which was already shared by some media organisations.
Rohatgi contended it isn’t anticipated {{that a}} accountable member of the bar would make such a tweet.
“He got the anticipatory bail. His SLP (special leave petition) is against the condition of bail. What is wrong in the condition?” he said.
Rohatgi argued the petitioner has neither appeared sooner than police nor has he filed an affidavit as directed by the extreme courtroom docket which said he shall file an endeavor to not tweet or forward any message that promotes enmity between completely completely different groups on grounds of religion, race, fatherland, residence, language and lots of others.
The bench suggested Luthra that the petitioner should go and appear sooner than the police.
Luthra said since there are a variety of FIRs in opposition to Umrao, police may arrest him.
The bench, after listening to the submissions, handed the order and likewise issued uncover to the state on his plea.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court said on Thursday a lawyer accused of spreading false particulars about assaults on migrant labourers from Bihar in Tamil Nadu must be “more responsible” and requested him to tender an apology.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Pankaj Mithal was listening to 2 separate pleas filed by advocate Prashant Kumar Umrao, whose verified Twitter take care of says he is a spokesperson for Uttar Pradesh BJP, along with the one tough a scenario imposed on him by the Madras High Court whereas granting anticipatory bail inside the case.
The apex courtroom docket modified the scenario imposed by the extreme courtroom docket which said that Umrao shall report sooner than the police daily at 10.30 am and 5.30 pm for a interval of 15 days and, thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.googletag.cmd.push(carry out() googletag.present(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); );
The excessive courtroom docket directed that the petitioner shall appear sooner than the investigating officer on April 10 and after that as and when the IO requires his presence.
“What is his standing at the bar?” the bench requested senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, who was displaying for the petitioner.
When Luthra said seven years, the bench seen, “He (petitioner) should be more responsible”.
“Before the next date, you tender an apology,” the bench said.
The apex courtroom docket moreover handed an ad-interim order saying the anticipatory bail granted to him by the extreme courtroom docket might be related in one other FIRs registered in Tamil Nadu with regard to the tweet.
Luthra said the petitioner has filed two petitions along with one in opposition to the scenario imposed by the extreme courtroom docket whereas granting anticipatory bail and the other looking for clubbing of FIRs lodged in opposition to him at completely completely different police stations over the tweet, which he later deleted.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, displaying for the state, said there was no completely different FIR whereby Umrao has been named.
An FIR was lodged in opposition to Umrao beneath quite a few sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with these for provocation with intent to set off a riot, promoting enmity and hatred, scary breach of peace and assertion leading to public mischief, the police had said.
Earlier on March 7, the Delhi High Court had granted transit anticipatory bail to Umrao till March 20 to technique a Chennai courtroom docket in reference to an FIR lodged by the Tamil Nadu Police for allegedly giving false information claiming assaults on migrant workers inside the state.
Later, he approached the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court looking for anticipatory bail.
In its March 21 order, the extreme courtroom docket had well-known that the prosecution’s case is that the petitioner had uploaded false content material materials on his Twitter internet web page claiming 15 Bihar natives had been hanged in a room in Tamil Nadu on account of they’d been speaking in Hindi and 12 of them died.
Umrao’s counsel had argued sooner than the extreme courtroom docket that the alleged tweet was initially exhibited in private info channels and he had merely re-tweeted it.
His counsel moreover said Umrao had deleted the tweet and that he would not assist any discrimination on the thought of religion, race, fatherland or language During the listening to sooner than the apex courtroom docket on Thursday, Luthra suggested the bench that quite a lot of FIRs have been lodged in opposition to Umrao at completely completely different police stations of Tamil Nadu over the tweet.
“They are lodging multiple FIRs at the behest of some political workers and individuals and harassing this young person (Umrao),” he said.
Luthra said the petitioner had solely re-tweeted info which was already shared by some media organisations.
Rohatgi contended it isn’t anticipated {{that a}} accountable member of the bar would make such a tweet.
“He got the anticipatory bail. His SLP (special leave petition) is against the condition of bail. What is wrong in the condition?” he said.
Rohatgi argued the petitioner has neither appeared sooner than police nor has he filed an affidavit as directed by the extreme courtroom docket which said he shall file an endeavor to not tweet or forward any message that promotes enmity between completely completely different groups on grounds of religion, race, fatherland, residence, language and lots of others.
The bench suggested Luthra that the petitioner should go and appear sooner than the police.
Luthra said since there are a variety of FIRs in opposition to Umrao, police may arrest him.
The bench, after listening to the submissions, handed the order and likewise issued uncover to the state on his plea.