Delhi High Court Questions Security Lapse on Parliament Attack Anniversary

Court Comments on Security Breach

On Thursday, the Delhi High Court remarked that the security lapse on December 13, 2023, during a parliamentary session could not be merely coincidental. This incident coincided with the anniversary of the 2001 terrorist attack on the Parliament.

The bench, comprising Justice Pratibha M. Singh and Justice Sudha Jain, made this observation while hearing bail petitions for three accused individuals - Manohar D, Sagar Sharma, and Lalit Jha - involved in the security breach case.

The defense attorney argued that there was no connection between the two events, asserting that the accused were merely protesting against unemployment. However, the bench countered, stating, 'This cannot be a coincidence... December 13 cannot be a coincidence.'

A senior lawyer representing the accused emphasized that while the method of protest might not have been appropriate, they should not be held in jail indefinitely. He stated, 'They were angry, but I completely agree that this method of protest was not right. If we look at history, the British did not keep people in jail indefinitely.'

He further stressed that no charges had been formally filed yet and that the accused were educated young individuals with no prior involvement in criminal activities. The lawyer representing the police mentioned that the prosecution had completed its arguments in the lower court regarding the charges.

The court has scheduled the next hearing for February and instructed the parties to review a Supreme Court ruling related to Gulafisha Fatima's case, who was recently granted bail under the UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act) in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots.

The three accused had appealed to the High Court against the lower court's rejection of their bail application in December 2024. Two other accused, Neelam Azad and Mahesh Kumawat, were granted bail by the High Court in July 2025.