Delh

Court refuses to extend interim bail to Ishrat Jahan

She was arrested in Delhi riots case

A Delhi court on Friday refused to extend the interim bail granted to former Congress councillor from Jagatpuri, Ishrat Jahan, arrested in connection with the north-east Delhi riots.

Ms. Jahan, who was recently released on interim bail to get married, was directed by Additional Sessions Judge Dharmender Rana to surrender in jail on Friday. The court also asked the Jail Superintendent to ensure adequate medical care to her.

Advocate Lalit Valecha, appearing for Ms. Jahan, said that after his client got married on June 12, her husband came in contact with a relative who was COVID-19 positive. Mr. Valecha said that Ms. Jahan has developed symptoms and doctors of Max Super Speciality Hospital, Patpargang, have advised her to stay in home isolation for seven days before undergoing a test. Mr. Valecha also argued that the investigation relating to her has already been completed and she is no more required to be detained in judicial custody. The advocate added that her Ms. Jahan’s husband’s test report was negative.

The investigating officer, in his report, stated that the doctor concerned has not prescribed any COVID-19 test and “it has also been reported that it is a simple case of flu with nothing specific”.

“Considering the totality of circumstances, especially the opinion of the doctor and the nature of offence, no ground for extension of interim bail is made out,” the judge said.

In a separate petition, Ms. Jahan on Friday moved the Delhi High Court, challenging the decision of a trial court here allowing 60 more days to the police to file chargesheet in a case against her.

Ms. Jahan, who is also an advocate, has been booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in connection with communal violence in north-east Delhi in February.

Ms. Jahan was arrested on March 21 in a case registered by the Crime Branch in relation to the riots in north-east Delhi. She was remanded to the police custody till April 5 and thereafter, has been remanded to judicial custody. Subsequently, the case was transferred to the Special Cell. On April 19, the sections under the UAPA were also invoked by the Special Cell.

Next Story