MY KOLKATA EDUGRAPH
ADVERTISEMENT
regular-article-logo Monday, 23 December 2024

Jignesh Mevani's bail plea rejected, sent to five-day police custody

Dalit leader’s counsel says the FIR is 'concocted, fabricated' and filed as an 'afterthought'

Umanand Jaiswal Guwahati Published 27.04.22, 02:50 AM
Jignesh Mevani.

Jignesh Mevani. File photo

An Assam court on Tuesday rejected the bail plea of Jignesh Mevani, Congress-backed Gujarat MLA and Dalit leader, and sent him to five days’ police custody on a policewoman’s complaint.

Mevani, who had been granted bail by a Kokrajhar court on Monday evening in connection with a tweet on Prime Minister Narendra Modi that had a reference to Mahatma Gandhi’s assassin Nathuram Godse, was arrested soon after by Barpeta police on the charge of assaulting and outraging the modesty of a policewoman.

ADVERTISEMENT

On Tuesday, while hearing Mevani’s appeal for bail, the Barpeta chief judicial magistrate’s court said in a written order: “...It appears that there exists sufficient material against the accused for police remand for a period of 5 days only as to ascertain the actual facts of the case and to visit the scene of crime for reconstruction and to identify the place of occurrence with the accused and in the interest of investigation, I am of the view that police remand is to be allowed for the above mentioned period i.e., for 5 days.”

The police had sought 12 days’ custody. Barpeta CJM M. Chetia is scheduled to hear the case again on May 1.

Mevani’s counsel had contended in the Barpeta court that the FIR was “concocted, fabricated” and filed as an “afterthought”.

The lawyers had said there was not a “single utterance” or mention of the alleged incident when Mevani was produced before the Kokrajhar CJM’s court on April 21 or when bail was granted on Monday.

The prosecution, the Assam government, said Mevani was produced before the Kokrajhar CJM at 5pm on April 21 while the Barpeta FIR was lodged at 9pm. Special public prosecutor Makhan Phukan told the Barpeta court that the question of intimating the Kokrajhar CJM about the FIR, therefore, did not arise.

Follow us on:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT