The Supreme Court took cognisance of allegations that the girl, whose social media video containing the remarks against PM Modi went viral, was being harassed and that her father had been attacked by alleged miscreants.
Seeking protection of the girl's identity, her lawyer told a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana that the girl had lodged an FIR at the Parliament Street Police Station over attacks on her family, but no action had been taken.
The lawyer also alleged that stones had been thrown at the girl's Delhi residence. He said the girl and her family had now moved to Noida.
Responding to the lawyer's submissions, the CJI Surya Kant-led bench said, "If there is even a little truth in her complaint, which appears to be correct, some precautionary measures should be taken for the protection of the girl and her family."
The bench directed the Uttar Pradesh Police to provide adequate security to the girl and her family and ordered the Delhi Police to file a status report on the investigation conducted on the basis of her FIR.
Justice Bagchi said, "We want immediate action on that FIR. These miscreants cannot be allowed to roam freely and harass the girl and her family, which is a serious matter. Her case is absolutely correct and it should be independently investigated and action should be taken against the miscreants."
The bench further said, "The miscreants and so-called protectors who allegedly harassed her or attacked her family's house cannot be allowed to roam freely and try to intimidate or threaten her. Immediate action should be taken against them as it is a serious matter."
Police had added provisions of the SC/ST Act (Prevention of Atrocities) to the FIR in connection with the alleged attack on the girl's father. Independent Bhardwaj, who was allegedly involved in the harassment, was recently arrested from Bulandshahr.
During the hearing, the Uttar Pradesh government also told the Supreme Court on Thursday that it had suspended the executive magistrate who had issued a "peace bond" notice to a second-year law student who had participated in a protest in Noida against the NEET-UG paper leak. The government clarified that the district magistrate had no role in the action.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta provided the information after a lawyer told the court that the law student had filed a petition challenging the executive magistrate's action. The action had been taken despite the Supreme Court's clear order on September 1 directing that all FIRs be quashed, no new FIRs be registered and no coercive steps be taken against the students.
The lawyer said the message should reach IAS and IPS officers about how the Supreme Court's orders were to be complied with. When the lawyer repeatedly referred to the district magistrate, Mehta said, "It was some other officer who has been suspended by the government. Let us not sensationalise this incident."
The Supreme Court's directions have placed immediate focus on the protection of the 14-year-old girl and her family, the investigation into the FIR and action against those allegedly involved in the harassment and attacks.
About The Author
Comment List