24.1 C
New Delhi
Wednesday, October 13, 2021
HomeIndiaPlea in SC challenges detention of Manipur’s political activist under NSA

Plea in SC challenges detention of Manipur’s political activist under NSA

A lawsuit was filed with the Supreme Court for the preventive detention of a political activist from Manipur under the National Security Act (NSA), which claims that it was done “solely to punish him” for his criticism of Bjp leaders allegedly promote cow dung and cow urine as cures for COVID-19

Declaration of guilt of the father of a political activist Leihombam Erendro, claimed that his son wrote on 13 May in Facebook this is a cure for coronavirus it is not cow dung and urine.

“The statement was made in the context of the death of President Manipur BJP due to COVID-19, as a criticism of the unscientific position and disinformation spread by some BJP politicians that cow urine and cow dung are effective in preventing / treating COVID-19,” the appeal, adding that the post was removed shortly after it was posted on May 13.

A petition filed through lawyer Shadan Farasat alleged that Erendro spent several days in custody under criminal charges against him for this criticism, and then in preventive detention after being released on bail.

“The present case is a shocking case of abuse of the preventive detention law to suppress completely innocuous speech that is fully protected by the constitution and was made in the public interest – Erendro, a political activist in Manipuri, was detained in a preventive manner solely to punish him for criticizing in society address. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for promoting cow dung and cow urine as a cure for COVID-19, ”the statement said.

He sought to overturn the May 17 detention order and the grounds for detention issued by the Imphal Western District Judge.

The appeal also appealed to the relevant authorities with a request to immediately release Erendro, who is one of the organizers of the political organization “People’s Revival and Justice”.

It stated that appropriate compensation, including legal costs, should be awarded to the petitioner and his son for the alleged unlawful detention to which Arendro had been subjected.

The petition alleged that his detention was in violation of the April 30 ruling of the higher court, and a separate petition of contempt of court was also filed with the higher court.

On April 30, the Supreme Court, hearing suo motu on the distribution of basic necessities and services during pandemic, warned authorities – from the Center to chiefs of police – against keeping people silent and pleading for help on the assumption that they are raising false complaints on the Internet.

The higher court made it clear that any attempt to restrict the free flow of information on social media, including calling people for help, would be considered contempt of court.

The statement said the Manipur police had registered four FIRs against Erendro.

He said Erendro was arrested on 13 May. himself and was remanded in custody until 17 May, the date on which his application for bail was to be submitted to the trial court.

He argued that pending trial by the first instance court and “knowing full well of the completely unreliable nature of the criminal proceedings”, the district judge had ordered preventive detention under the National Security Agency in order to “pay bail”. provided by the court.

The statement said that Erendro was released on bail but was not released due to the detention order.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisment -

Most Popular

Recent Comments