Parl security breach: Court denies bail to woman accused

New Delhi: A Delhi court on Wednesday denied bail to Neelam Azad, the only

woman arrested in the December 13 Parliament security breach case.

Additional Sessions Judge Hardeeep Kaur said there were sufficient evidence to believe that allegations against Azad were ‘prima facie’ true.

“There are sufficient reasonable grounds for believing that the allegations made against applicant Neelam are prima facie true. Therefore, this court does not find it to be a fit case to grant regular bail to Neelam and the present bail application stands dismissed,” the judge said.

The judge noted that all the accused persons — Azad, Manoranjan D, Sagar Sharma, Amol Dhanraj Shinde, Lalit Jha and Mahesh Kumawat — already had the knowledge about the threat given

by designated terrorist Gurpatwant Singh Pannu for targeting the Parliament on December 13 last year.

Despite the threat perception, accused persons being aware of the same carried out the alleged offence in the Parliament on the same day, the judge observed.

The judge said that the material available on record and perusal of the charge sheet further reveal that prior to committing the alleged terrorist act, meetings were organised where the whole planning to commit the alleged terrorist act was discussed and total five such meetings were conducted from February, 2022 till the day of incident, and Azad attended last three such meetings.

The judge on September 9 extended the judicial

custody of all the accused till October 16.

During the arguments, the counsel appearing for Azad told the judge that she was not involved in breach

of Parliament security and that she was falsely implicated in the case.

The counsel claimed that the police have already filed a charge sheet and two supplementary charge sheets in the case and the court has already taken cognisance of them.

“It was Manoranjan D and Sagar Sharma who jumped into the well of the Parliament and threw smoke canisters,” the counsel told the court.

He said that Azad was outside the Parliament where she opened similar smoke canisters and threw pamphlets “to highlight the problem of unemployed youth” and that she was trying to bring public attention via social media. Azad claimed that the smoke canisters were not harmful.

“She was not part of the criminal conspiracy. The investigation is complete and it will take a long time for the court to decide the case,” Azad said in her application.