A Delhi court on Monday reserved its order on the bail plea of a married couple accused of hurling racial slurs at their neighbours from Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur
Share
NEW DELHI — A Delhi court on Monday reserved its order on the bail plea of a married couple accused of hurling racial slurs at their neighbours from Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur.
Additional Sessions Judge Samar Vishal heard the arguments presented by both parties on Monday and reserved the order for Tuesday.
The accused, Harsh Priya Singh and Ruby Jain, were arrested on February 25 by the Delhi Police for allegedly hurling racial slurs at the three northeastern women in south Delhi's Malviya Nagar area.
The counsel for the accused, advocate Gaurav, argued that the present case was merely a spontaneous dispute between two neighbours, where both parties used questionable language and derogatory remarks. It was not a case of racial discrimination that attracted the charges under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, as the accused were not aware that the complainants were tribal. They did not use any language specifically targeting their tribal identity, he said.
Also read: Delhi couple arrested over charge of hurling racial slurs at Northeast neighbours
He also argued the dispute occurred within their rented accommodation, which is not a "public place" as per the essential ingredients of an offence under Section 3 of the SC/ST Act.
He also submitted that the Police Control Room (PCR) call was made by the accused themselves, as they also felt intimidated by the words used by the complainants.
Gaurav further argued that all evidence related to the incident had been seized by the police, and the accused had earlier joined the investigation on their own volition before their arrest, so there is no need for further custodial interrogation.
He also argued that Section 196 (promoting enmity between different racial groups) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) should not be attracted in the present case, as the complainants themselves uploaded the video on social media and led to its widespread dissemination.
He also alleged that the medical condition of Ruby Jain has deteriorated in jail as her treatment has been interrupted. While the advocate did not disclose any details regarding the medical condition, he pleaded for Jain's bail application to be viewed under the special considerations for the grant of bail to women in non-bailable offences under Section 480 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). He also alleged that her medical condition affects her mood and heightens aggression, which may have impacted her behaviour on the day of the incident.
The counsel for the complainant, Liyi Noshi, opposed the bail plea as the investigation is still ongoing and the accused may attempt to influence the prosecution witnesses if released. One of the primary eyewitnesses to the incident, the electrician who installed the air conditioner, is yet to be examined, she said.
She also argued that the accused had made attempts to intimidate the complainants. Shortly after the incident, they were called to their landlord's house as an attempt to "mediate" between the neighbours, wherein they were pressured to de-escalate the matter. She also alleged that the three women have been worried about their safety as people have shown up to their door in the middle of the night after the incident.
She emphasised that the lives of the girls have been heavily impacted by the incident. One of the girls who is from Manipur had to leave Delhi and move back home amidst ongoing ethnic violence in the state with great difficulty, she said.
Opposing the argument that Section 196 of BNS is not attracted, she stated that the video was not uploaded online by the complainants. They had initially sent the video to their friends seeking help, but the video ended up being widely disseminated and uploaded on social media in a chain of events beyond their control, she said.
She also questioned the argument posed by the opposing counsel on there being no racial discrimination, as she stated, "The accused was clearly heard saying, 'You northeastern people are shit', how is that not a derogatory remark attacking a certain community?"
Advocate Gaurav denied any claims of the complainants being intimidated after the incident, highlighting that no criminal complaints have been filed regarding these instances.
He also alleged that the case was marred by political influence and subjected to a media trial, as he said, "Everyone, from the chief ministers of the seven sister states to Union Minister Kiren Rijiju, joined in to comment on this case after the media covered this incident. If we need to be political, there are bigger matters in the country."
The present case pertains to the accused couple allegedly making abusive and derogatory remarks against the three women from Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur during a row over debris from the installation of an air conditioner at their rented accommodation on February 20.
The police have invoked the SC/ST Act in the FIR against the duo. They said the case was initially registered under sections of the BNS, invoking charges of criminal intimidation, insult to the modesty of women, and promoting enmity between groups.