V K Singh's alleged dog remark: Court reserves order on plea

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Apr 18 2016 | 8:28 PM IST
A Delhi court today reserved its order on a plea challenging a magisterial court's decision dismissing a criminal complaint seeking registration of FIR against Union Minister V K Singh for his alleged "dog" remarks in the aftermath of burning of two Dalit children in Haryana.
Additional Sessions Judge Ajay Gupta fixed April 30 for pronouncing the order on the revision petition filed by an advocate after hearing arguments.
The police had opposed the plea, saying no cognisable offence was made out against Singh for his alleged remarks on October 21, 2015.
The revision petition was filed in December last year by complainant, advocate Satya Prakash Gautam, challenging the trial court's order alleging that the magistrate "has only desperately tried to shield the proposed accused under various pretexts including those not even on record, like the intention of the proposed accused while making impugned statements which were the basis of filing the present complaint."
"It is clear...That the metropolitan magistrate has tried to step into the shoes of the counsel of the proposed accused to defend him. Thus, the impugned order deserves to be set aside on this ground alone," Gautam had claimed.
The magisterial court had on December 7, 2015 dismissed his plea observing that no criminal offence was "ex-facie" made out against the former Army chief.
The court had said that for no reason Singh's statement could be seen as a remark made to demean any caste or creed and it did not see the comment as an "analogy drawn between dog (as an animal) and humans (of a caste or creed)".
The complainant had alleged that Singh, the Minister of State for External Affairs, had hurt the sentiments of the Dalit community by such remarks.
Singh had kicked up a storm with his alleged remarks in connection with the Faridabad incident that the government cannot be blamed if anyone throws a stone at a dog.
The court had earlier directed the police to file an action taken report (ATR) on the complaint seeking lodging of FIR against Singh under provisions of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Information Technology Act and IPC.
The police, in its ATR, had told the court that Singh had not made any "specific derogatory and humiliating statement" warranting his prosecution on the complaint.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Apr 18 2016 | 8:28 PM IST

Next Story