UP cops to explain teenager’s arrest in Supreme Court
20 March 2015 12:31 AM GMT
The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear on Friday, a plea seeking explanation from Uttar Pradesh Police the circumstances under which a Class XII student was arrested for allegedly posting on Facebook ‘objectionable’ comments against senior Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan. The application in this regard was mentioned before a bench comprising Justices AR Dave, J Chelameswar and Kurian Jospeh which said that the matter will be listed for hearing on Friday.
By the time, advocate Manali Singhal made an oral mention of the application, news had reached that the 19-year-old youth was granted bail and would walk out of the jail shortly on completion of formalities. A local court had on Wednesday sent him to 14-day judicial custody. When the bench said that the youth has already been granted bail, Singhal pleaded that the matter required to be heard as there was a need for explanation from the Uttar Pradesh Police as to how he remained in jail for four days for the alleged offence under section 66A of the IT Act which has been challenged and the judgement has been reserved by the apex court on February 26.
The present application questioning the arrest of Bareilly youth was filed by a Delhi-based girl and law student Shreya Shingal, who was the first person to file a PIL challenging the validity of section 66A of the Information and Technology Act. She has also sought amendment in Section 66A of the Act, after two girls - Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan - were arrested in Palghar in Thane district as one of them posted a comment on the Mumbai shut down following Bal Thackeray’s death.
By the time, advocate Manali Singhal made an oral mention of the application, news had reached that the 19-year-old youth was granted bail and would walk out of the jail shortly on completion of formalities. A local court had on Wednesday sent him to 14-day judicial custody. When the bench said that the youth has already been granted bail, Singhal pleaded that the matter required to be heard as there was a need for explanation from the Uttar Pradesh Police as to how he remained in jail for four days for the alleged offence under section 66A of the IT Act which has been challenged and the judgement has been reserved by the apex court on February 26.
The present application questioning the arrest of Bareilly youth was filed by a Delhi-based girl and law student Shreya Shingal, who was the first person to file a PIL challenging the validity of section 66A of the Information and Technology Act. She has also sought amendment in Section 66A of the Act, after two girls - Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan - were arrested in Palghar in Thane district as one of them posted a comment on the Mumbai shut down following Bal Thackeray’s death.
Next Story
