When the High Court told the lawyer, ‘CrPC is a joke, sir…’

0
5
When the High Court told the lawyer, ‘CrPC is a joke, sir…’

Delhi High Court News: The Delhi High Court on Monday (May 15) reserved its decision on a public interest litigation. The plea sought a direction to Delhi Police to ask the complainants whether they are ready to undergo scientific tests like narco analysis and brain mapping during investigation to prove the allegations. The motive behind this is to control the wrong case.

“We are not the law makers,” said a bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramaniam Prasad while hearing a petition filed by advocate and BJP leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.

Demand to give this instruction to the police

Ashwini Upadhyay’s petition also seeks a direction to the police to ask the accused whether they are willing to undergo such scientific tests to prove their innocence and record the statement in the charge sheet, so that “police investigation time and precious judicial time can be reduced.

Explain that the Law Commission of India has been asked to prepare a detailed report to control fake cases by examining the best practices of developed countries.

It’s a joke…

Ashwini Upadhyay was praying during the court hearing, Chief Justice Sharma orally remarked, “Mazaak thodi hai. CrPC hai sahib (This is not a joke. This is CrPC). Where is it written that a sentence Can we ask more? We will not go beyond CrPC. Please show us that there is a mandatory provision in CrPC that police must ask (complainant)? We are not law makers.”

a process of extracting information

In her petition, Ashwini Upadhyay has argued that narco-analysis is not compulsion as it is merely a process of extracting information. The petitioner states in the petition that a person can seek protection under Article 20(3) when he is charged with an offense and compelled to be a witness against himself, but has no time to record his statement. For whether he is ready to undergo narco test, polygraphy and brain mapping test to prove it.

It has been said in the petition that Article 20(3) will not be violated by his accusation or innocence.

Read this also: Center vs Delhi: Even after the decision of the Supreme Court, the dispute between the Delhi government and the officials is not stopping, where is the screw stuck? learn

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here