Plot to kill PM can’t be vague charge: Justice Chandrachud's vehement dissent in Bhima-Koregaon verdict

The majority judgement refused to constitute a SIT to look into the arrests. Justice AM Khanwilkar delivering the majority opinion stated that the court’s earlier order calling for house arrests of the activists and lawyers, will continue to continue for four more weeks.

 Justice Khanwilkar held that accused persons don’t have a say in which investigating agency should probe the case.

He added that it wasn’t just an arrest of merely political dissent and the accused had the liberty to pursue other appropriate measures.  

Pic Source: PTI

Justice DY Chandrachud penned another strongly worded dissent, berating the Maharashtra Police for what he termed using ‘electronic media selectively for shaping public opinion’.

He said: "When someone says there is a plot to assassinate the Prime Minister, it must be investigated but it cannot be vague allegations bereft of materials."

Source: Allahabad High Court

Justice Chandrachud, in his judgement dissenting with the majority, said arrest of the five accused was an attempt by state to muzzle dissent, and dissent is symbol of a vibrant democracy.

Pic Source: Sudha Bhardwaj (PTI)

On Maha Police claim, aboust assasination, he said the alleged Maiost links including claims to assassinate PM Modi were ‘vague allegations bereft of materials’.

Source: PTI

On the issue of maintainability, he said that technicalities shouldn’t be allowed to ‘override substantive justice’.

Slamming the Pune Police presser, he called it an attempt to selectively leak information and termed it ‘disconcerting’.

He said that electronic media and police briefing was being used to ‘shape public opinion’. He noted that a letter ‘allegedly written’ by Sudha Bhardwaj had been flashed on a TV channel and selective disclosure of probe details cast a cloud on the investigation. 

Source: PTI

He even raised doubts questioning the ability of the Maharashtra Police to carry out the investigation in a ‘fair manner’.

Source: FILE PHOTO 

He went to order an SIT stating that voices of opposition cannot be muzzled because it’s unpopular, saying: “Voices of opposition cannot be muzzled because it is dissent. Deprivation of liberty cannot be compensated later.”

Source: FILE PHOTO