'Can't browbeat child': SC on CJP protester's intimidation complaint against 'influencer'

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday took serious note of allegations that a 14-year-old girl associated with the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protests was harassed and that her residence was subjected to stone pelting, directing authorities to act on her FIR and provide protection to her and her family.A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to ensure action on the girl's FIR and sought status reports from the Delhi and Uttar Pradesh governments on the allegations, security arrangements and action taken against those allegedly involved.The court stressed that nobody could be allowed to intimidate a victim or her family to prevent them from pursuing criminal proceedings."

Such matters cannot be taken lightly. Nobody should be protected if violence against a child is involved... if persons accused of such acts were roaming free and attempting to browbeat the child or her family so that they do not pursue criminal proceedings, it would be a serious matter." There cannot be any second opinion about it. Such matters cannot be taken lightly. Nobody should be protected. If violence against a child is involved and persons are roaming free and trying to browbeat the child or the family so that they do not pursue the criminal proceedings, that may be a serious matter," the bench observed.The counsel appearing for the minor told the court that she had been harassed and her house vandalised after she registered an FIR against a person who allegedly claimed in a video that he had attacked her father during the CJP's protest.The lawyer alleged that instead of prosecuting people who accompanied the accused and were allegedly captured on camera, an FIR had been registered against the child.

The counsel also submitted that this was contrary to an earlier Supreme Court order and that video evidence showing stone pelting at the girl's residence could be placed before the court." The high-powered committee will take time, but if something happens to the child in the meantime, that cannot subsequently be reversed or repaired through the committee," the counsel submitted.Responding to the submission, CJI Surya Kant said, "If there are anti-social elements who indulged in violence against child, and they are roaming free, and are trying to browbeat the child, that may be a serious thing."

The Chief Justice further told the Solicitor General, "Child is a child. Some measures to protect the child can be taken. This incident can be taken as a standalone [case] by local police." Justice Joymalya Bagchi also directed that immediate action be taken on the FIR and that the minor and her family be provided police protection." We would like immediate action on that FIR and police protection to victim and family by UP police.

Investigation be conducted by Parliament Street PS". The counsel also alleged that videos showed four policemen accompanying the persons who attacked the protesters and claimed that no action had been taken against them.Delhi Police action against accusedThe Supreme Court proceedings came days after Delhi Police on September 5 added provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and criminal intimidation to an FIR against Hindutva influencer Swatantra Bhardwaj over the alleged assault on the minor activist's father during the CJP-led protests.Bhardwaj was detained in Bulandshahr after the CJP staged a protest outside Parliament Street police station demanding his arrest over the alleged assault.The police action followed an interview in which Bhardwaj allegedly claimed that he had "cracked the skull" of the minor activist's father during the July 20 protest and escaped arrest because of his political connections.During Thursday's hearing, Senior Advocate PV Dinesh also mentioned a plea filed by second-year law student Akshat Tripathi challenging a notice issued to him by the Executive Magistrate, Greater Noida.

The notice was subsequently withdrawn.Dinesh urged the court to hear the plea, arguing that a strong message needed to be sent to IAS officers.Get the latest India News and Live updates. Download the TOI app.