Chief Secretary Anshu Prakash’s alleged assault by Aam Aadmi Party lawmakers took a new turn on Thursday with the Chief Minister’s adviser V.K. Jain stating that he had seen Mr. Prakash being manhandled.
Special Public Prosecutor in the case Atul Srivastava, appearing before the court of MM Shefali Barnala Tandon, cited the recording of Mr. Jain’s statement before a metropolitan magistrate, wherein he admitted to the Chief Secretary being assaulted at a late-night meeting called at the Chief Minister’s residence on February 19. In addition to that, the police had taken into possession the CCTV footage pertaining to the incident.
Earlier, the police informed the court that they had recorded the statement of Mr. Jain, a retired IAS officer as an eyewitness under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with the case. A statement under this section is admissible as evidence in the trial of a case. The police had earlier recorded Mr. Jain’s statement under Section 161 of the CrPC.
The statement has been kept in a sealed cover in the court and will be opened at the time of the trial of the case. However, a copy of it was made available to the police.
On the basis of this statement, the police moved a fresh application seeking police remand of the two MLAs, Amanatullah Khan and Prakash Jarwal. M.M. Tandon, however, remanded the AAP MLAs in judicial custody for 14 days.
Mr. Srivastava said that Mr. Jain had admitted that the Chief Secretary was assaulted at the meeting and that it took place at midnight. As per Mr. Srivastava’s submission of Mr. Jain’s account, the CM’s adviser had gone out for a few minutes when the meeting was on.
When he came back, he saw that the two MLAs were misbehaving with and assaulting the Chief Secretary.
Reserving orders on a second application for police remand and the bail applications, a Delhi court on Thursday remanded AAP MLAs Amantullah Khan and Prakash Jarwal to judicial custody for 14 days in the Delhi Chief Secretary Anshu Prakash assault case. Ms. Tandon reserved the orders on the two applications for Friday.
Mr. Srivastava sought police remand citing the change of facts in view of the recording of the statement of V.K. Jain, a retired IAS officer and adviser to CM Arvind Kejriwal, before an MM. Mr. Srivastava said that Mr. Jain had admitted that the Chief Secretary was assaulted at the meeting. In addition to that, the police had taken into possession the CCTV footage of the incident.
Opposing the police remand application, counsel for the two MLAs, B.S. Joon submitted that the case against the two MLAs was politically motivated. Mr. Joon submitted that the prosecution had not produced any fresh facts for the police remand. The statement of Mr. Jain was available with the police on Wednesday itself but it was not submitted to the court, Mr. Joon charged.
Rajiv Mohan, counsel for the Chief Secretary, submitted that though the bureaucracy functions under the government, it could not be forced to do unlawful works.
Though Mr. Jain and Deputy CM Manish Sisodia informed the Chief Secretary over phone that the agenda of the meeting was on issues about the Civil Supplies Department, the MLAs present at the meeting started questioning him about the release of funds for publicity of the achievements of the AAP government in the past three years, Rajiv Mohan, counsel for the Chief Secretary said.
‘Beyond his power’
In reply to the MLAs’ queries, the Chief Secretary said that he could not give his approval for the publicity catch-line “Corruption-free Delhi” as the Vigilance Department had not given its consent to it.
The Chief Secretary also refused to approve advertisements for television channels as the budget for it was beyond his power. Then the MLAs started assaulting the Chief Secretary. The CM and the Deputy CM who were present at the meeting did not make any effort to restrain the MLAs, Mr. Mohan further submitted.
