The Supreme Court refuses to allow the victim of violence in Delhi to intervene in the hate speech case of activist Harsh Mander | India News
Lead lawyer Colin Gonsalves mentioned the matter before a bank headed by the president of Supreme Court S A Bobde and said the disturbance victim wanted to intervene in the Harsh Mander case, which is scheduled to be heard on Friday.
“We will not allow him to intervene,” Bobde told the defender.
Gonsalves said he had seen the video of an alleged hate speech by Mander and wanted to leave it on the record.
“We asked the attorney general to put it (video of Mander’s alleged hate speech) on the record. We don’t need him in that procedure,” said the President of the Supreme Court of India (CJI).
When Gonsalves said that he had appeared by Mander before the superior court on violence in Delhi, the bank said: “You can also appear for him here.”
The Delhi police filed a sworn statement in the Supreme Court against Mander on Wednesday and requested the initiation of a contempt process against him for alleged “derogatory observations” making advances against the main court and its judges.
The affidavit was filed after the Center’s accusation before the Supreme Court that Mander, who requested the registration of FIRs against some BJP leaders for his alleged hate speech that allegedly led to violence in Delhi, he himself made certain observations objectionable against the superior court, “Majesty of the law”, the government and the Parliament.
The Supreme Court had taken note of the Center’s accusations and not only refused to listen to Mander’s lawyer, Karuna Nundy, until the subject of his alleged hate speech was “resolved,” but he also kept his request to himself. while transferring other allegations related to violence to the High Court of Delhi.
Attorney General Tushar Mehta referred to some of the alleged hate speeches delivered by Mander during the protests against the CAA and at Jamia Millia Islamia on December 16 of last year.
He had read in the court certain excerpts from Mander’s alleged speeches and said they included objectionable statements about the main court, Parliament and the government.
The Supreme Court, in May of last year, had criticized Mander for seeking the challenge of the then CJI by hearing his PIL say that he would not allow anyone to “intimidate” and “damage the institution.”
The then CJI Ranjan Gogoi had eliminated Mander’s name as the petitioner and appointed his lawyer Prashant Bhushan as the amicus curiae in the case.