JNU row: Court dismisses cops' plea to collect voice samples

A Delhi court today refused to allow Delhi Police to collect voice samples of two JNU students -- Umar Khalid and Anirban Bhattacharya, arrested in a sedition case.
According to court sources, Metropolitan Magistrate Lovleen dismissed the application of Delhi Police, which had arrested both the accused students after they surrendered on the night of February 23, seeking permission to collect their voice samples for investigation in the matter.
Umar and Anirban were last night sent to three days police remand at the South Campus Police Station near JNU which was turned into a makeshift court room following an order of the Delhi High Court to "maintain confidentiality" during their remand proceedings.

Police had demanded seven days' custody of the duo, who had allegedly organised a controversial event at JNU on February 9 where anti-India slogans were alleged to have been raised.
Police yesterday also applied for production of JNUSU President Kanhaiya Kumar so that all the three students can be interrogated together.
The Delhi High Court had yesterday ordered maintenance of "confidentiality" during the remand proceedings of Kanhaiya, Umar and Anirban and directed police to ensure that no one "suffers even a scratch" in wake of the Patiala House court violence on February 15 and 17.

The high court order had come during the hearing on Kumar's bail plea after it was informed that he and Umar and Anirban were apprehending threat to their safety and security during production in a Patiala House court for remand proceedings.

According to police before being arrested, Umar and Anirban were questioned for at least five hours in which police inquired about their whereabouts during the phase when cops were on a look out for them.
Police also inquired whether two of them were the main organisers of the February 9 event against the hanging of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru, and whether they were involved in alleged anti-India sloganeering.
The duo had returned to the JNU campus last Sunday after going missing since February 12.
The plea, which was filed through SDM of Vasant Vihar
Sunil Dutt Sharma, also annexed list of witnesses which they sought to examine in support of the complaint.

The hearing saw heated exchanges between the counsel for the AAP government and advocate Vijay Aggarwal who appeared for one of the channels.
The government's counsel objected to the intervention of Aggarwal saying his client was a proposed accused and he had no locus to appear in the matter at this stage.
However, the channel's counsel said he was addressing the court and urged the magistrate to give him a hearing.
Meanwhile, the counsel moved two separate pleas on behalf of one of the three channels, seeking to stay the proceedings of this complaint as the investigation on an FIR registered on February 11 in the JNU protest at Vasant Kunj North police station was pending.

The other plea sought prosecution of unknown persons who were part of filing the government's complaint for allegedly making false claim in the court.
Hariharan read out a portion of the complaint that said, "The accused knowingly and with malicious intent have caused damage and/or injury to the students of JNU and to the JNU institution and have disrupted communal harmony, public tranquility and security in Delhi by transmitting a forged/ fabricated/ doctored/ altered video(s). These video(s) are forged/ fabricated/ altered in material form.
"It is evident that the doctoring, use, dissemination and broadcast of these videos was deliberate and intentional and the accused persons thus created false document(s). They have used the false documents as genuine. The accused persons are therefore liable for prosecution under Sections 465(punishment for forgery) and 471 (using as genuine forged document or electronic record) of IPC.