Delhi Court Grants Bail to Law Students Accused of Misconduct in Supreme Court
Bail Granted Amidst Allegations of Misconduct
New Delhi, July 29 - A Delhi court has granted bail to two law students who were arrested for allegedly using abusive language, assaulting security personnel, and obstructing judicial proceedings during a hearing at the Supreme Court. The court emphasized that the significance and integrity of a prestigious institution like the Supreme Court cannot be undermined by the unruly behavior of a single agitated petitioner representing themselves without legal counsel. However, Judicial Magistrate Ravi made it clear in his order that such conduct is entirely unacceptable and deserves condemnation.
Details of the Incident
The court was hearing the bail applications of Prabal Pratap Singh (24), a third-year law student from Lucknow University, and Chander Bhan (23), a second-year law student from Raebareli. Prabal Pratap appeared in court as the petitioner in this case. According to police reports, the incident occurred on July 10 during the hearing of a special leave petition involving Prabal Pratap and others against the State of Uttar Pradesh in courtroom number 13 of the Supreme Court.
Allegations Against the Students
Police allege that during the hearing, Prabal Pratap used abusive and unparliamentary language, threw papers in the courtroom, created a disturbance, and engaged in physical altercations with security personnel. In its order dated July 27, the court noted that the behavior displayed could potentially tarnish the dignity and decorum of the highest constitutional court. The court stated, 'No petitioner, regardless of their dissatisfaction with the outcome of their case or their self-representation, is entitled to throw papers in court or use abusive language towards the presiding judge or the Chief Justice of India.'
Court's Stance on Judicial Conduct
The magistrate remarked that failing to address such behavior could imply tacit approval, thus it is crucial to clarify that such conduct is unacceptable and should be strongly condemned. He expressed hope that both defendants would maintain necessary restraint and decorum in future judicial proceedings. However, the court also acknowledged that the Supreme Court had approached the matter with considerable restraint and patience. On July 10, the Supreme Court bench noted that the petitioner had made inconsistent and unparliamentary remarks but did not propose any action against him.
Conclusion and Bail Conditions
The magistrate stated, 'An institution like the Supreme Court is not influenced by the unruly behavior of an individual. Therefore, subordinate courts should also exercise the same institutional restraint and balance that the Supreme Court has demonstrated when considering bail.' The court highlighted that there is a provision for a maximum sentence of two years for charges such as assaulting a public servant and obstructing government work. The Delhi police have completed their investigation and no further recovery or police custody interrogation is required.
The court ordered the release of both accused on a personal bond of ₹25,000 and a surety bond of the same amount, with the condition that they will appear as required and maintain decorum during all future judicial proceedings.