Delhi Court Grants Protection From Arrest to Shehla Rashid

Shehla Rashid

Additional sessions judge Pawan Kumar Jain at Patiala House court on Monday granted relief from arrest to Jammu and Kashmir People’s Movement leader Shehla Rashid, who has been booked for sedition for tweeting that the armed forces allegedly tortured civilians and ransacked houses in Kashmir Valley.

In his order judge Jain wrote: “I am of the view that the matter requires investigation in detail” and posted it next for November 5. Till then, he ordered that the “accused shall not be arrested”, and directed that she would “join the investigation” as and when called by the investigation officer.

Rashid had shared some information on her Twitter (account) on August 17, where she had alleged that the armed forces entered houses in Kashmir at night and “ransacked” them. She had also alleged that four men were called to an Army camp in Shopian and “interrogated (tortured)”.

“on the basis of her comments, one advocate made a complaint to the Special Cell (of Delhi Police) and on the basis of said complaint, police has registered an FIR” but has not issued any notice to the accused. Police has thus far not received any complaint from the Indian Army.

According to The Wire, Rashid had described the charge levelled against her as “frivolous, politically motivated and a pathetic attempt to silence” her.

Standing by her comments, Rashid had stated that she could even furnish proof if the Indian army was to initiate an inquiry into her claims. It is “important to put out narratives of the people, so that people in the rest of India know what is happening there”, The Wire reported her saying.

This case has once again highlighted how the serious provision of sedition is used arbitrarily to silence complaints and voices of dissent.

Its only two days ago, speaking on the law of sedition in India at an event, Justice Deepak Gupta of the Supreme Court spoke of the preamble of India’s constitution which states that “there cannot be any democratic polity where citizens do not have the right to think as they like, express their thoughts, have their own beliefs and faith, and worship in a manner which they feel like.”