Even as dalit rights activist and independent MLA from Vadgam, Gujarat, Jignesh Mevani got bail in a case of alleged assault on a policewoman, Anand Yagnik, one of the leading lawyers of Gujarat, has opined that it was a cheap tactic to create an FIR when you cannot implicate a person in an illegal arrest case.
Mevani was first arrested by Assam Police from Palanpur in Gujarat for his alleged controversial tweet that mentioned Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s name. Soon after he got bail, he was arrested for allegedly assaulting a policewoman.
Yagnik, who has been Mevani’s lawyer for years, told THE WEEK that when the “alleged crime” has happened within the custody of police and away from public glare it has only police as a witness. He said that while pronouncing judgment in the case of D.K. Baus versus West Bengal, the Supreme Court had made it clear that a charge of assault on the police by an accused, who is already in the custody, must be viewed in a different manner as there is no independent evidence.
All the witnesses, he said, are police. “One police makes an allegation against an accused, who is under their custody, and it is witnessed by another policeman,” he observed.
According to him, the accused does not have a chance to have an independent witness, but he is made to suffer statements of all “interested witnesses”.
Having said this, Yagnik, who acted as bridge between Gujarat and Assam providing all legal help, observed that Mevani can be convicted in this case, but it is an easy and cheap tactic that if you can’t implicate a person in an illegal arrest case, you create an FIR where public sentiments are divided with a woman police involved.
As regards the arrest of Mevani in connection with his now controversial tweet in which he had exhorted Modi to appeal for communal harmony by referring him to be a person who follows Godse, Yagnik strongly opined that it is an “unsound” case.
Foundation is a tweet, he said, adding that the Supreme Court has very recently in the matter of a journalist from Assam said that a statement with a scathing observation against elected person of a state in oblivious of any instigation to cause public disorder, irrespective of any attempt to incite violence by instigating one community against other do not constitute such offence.
The apex court’s observations were in connection with sections 153 A & B and 295 of the IPC.
Yagnik also said that in 1962 in Kedarnath judgment, the Supreme Court had observed that very serious criticism, howsoever serious and severe, if it is not accompanied with incitement of violence, instigating one society against another, then such offence is not made out.
According to him, Mevani’s arrest in the first case was illegal because if a person is charged up to seven years one does not arrest him. A notice has to be issued, inquiry needs to be done to find if there is a prima facie case or not.
In Assam, Mevani was represented by Angshuman Bora.
Even as Gujarat eagerly awaits the return of Mevani, who is expected to be released later in the day on Saturday, his team is all set to file a case in the Gujarat High Court against move by the Gujarat Police to pick up computers, laptops and mobile phones from Mevani’s office, home and that of his associates.
Yagnik said that no orders were shown and the Gujarat Police apparently acted under the orders of Assam Police. He said that under Article 20 of the Constitution of India, no person can be compelled to give evidence against himself.
Meanwhile, dalits in 1,000 villages of India are to go ahead with the protest against Mevani’s arrest on May 1 – Gujarat Day.
Leading dalit rights activist Martin Macwan told THE WEEK that Gujarat Day is dear to us and we are proud about it, but at the same time the independence of our children is dear to us. The call, he said, was given not just for Mevani’s arrest but was also about cases against the dalits and what has been happening. It was about illegal arrest, he said.
