New Delhi: Making it clear that it has no “hitch” in saying that Congress leader Alka Lamba was liable for all offences that she was accused of in the July 2024 Jantar Mantar protest case, a Delhi court has convicted her for obstructing public servants from discharging their official duties, and for using criminal force against them.
The case dates back to 29 July 2024, when the Congress’ women’s wing had called a protest demanding women’s reservation in New Delhi; Lamba was the main speaker at the event. But things got out of hand when Lamba, along with other protesters, allegedly came marching towards the barricades placed on Tolstoy Road, raising slogans to surround Parliament.
According to the prosecution, the protesters were warned that prohibitory orders were in place and asked to end the protest. But, the police alleged, the protesters pushed aside the female and male police officials, jumped the barricades and even blocked the roads, hindering people’s right of way. After that the protesters were detained, police told the court.
On the other hand, Lamba invoked her right to free speech and expression, including her right to protest peacefully under Article 19. But the court rejected her argument saying that the fundamental right to free speech and expression can be reasonably restricted in the interests of maintaining public order or state security, among other reasons.
The court added that the protesters ignoring the warnings of the police officers spoke volumes about their conduct.
Interestingly, the court’s 80-page order also pointed out that the investigation in this case was “lacking” in identifying all protesters who violated the prohibitory orders, or those who pushed the police officers and blocked the public road.
However, the court made clear that such shortcomings in the investigation would not absolve Lamba of her wrongdoings.
“This court cannot fault the investigation when it comes to Lamba, however, as she took a lead in the dharna or demonstration and even found a pivotal place in the posters at the venue which referred to her as the National President of the All India Women Congress, a political body which had organised the protest.”
Reasons for Lamba’s conviction
Taking note of the allegation that Lamba, along with other protesters had used criminal force against police officials, and even jumped the barricade transcending the human chain formed by policemen at the time of the incident, the court held that Lamba “clearly intended to prevent and deter the police officials” from discharging their duty as public servants.
“No physical injury is strictly required; intentional causing of motion or change of motion to deter a public servant would be sufficient,” the court said, while making it clear that the offence of assaulting a public servant to prevent them from discharging their duty does not require any physical injury.
Stating that Lamba had indeed obstructed policemen from discharging their public duty of maintaining law and order at the Jantar Mantar protest site in order to carry out their protests, the court said that she also caused “annoyance” to the police officials there, along with a risk of injury to herself and others.
The court recalled that a prohibitory order restricting protests and unlawful assembly was issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sub-Division Parliament Street, New Delhi District, which was in force in the area at the time the protests turned into a source of nuisance or danger. However, Lamba clearly disobeyed this order by jumping the barricades, while knowing that the order was in force then.
Lamba also hindered access to the public way, where the general public, police personnel and media had a right of way or passage. In fact, she lay on the road for an extended amount of time despite a clear announcement to vacate the area, the court noted.
Recalling the duty of all citizens to safeguard public property and reject violence under Article 51A of the Constitution, the court said that Lamba, being a responsible citizen, was duty-bound to ensure public order while protesting. However, she “miserably failed” to fulfill the corresponding duty and paid no heed to warnings given to her by the police officials declaring her protest as unlawful, the court said.
(Edited by Viny Mishra)
Also read: In poll-bound TN, Mahila wing national president & sacked state chief’s spat adds to Congress’s woes