New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday pulled up the Central government and the Delhi Police for not filing a response in time despite being given a last and final opportunity to submit a counter-affidavit in regard to Bengaluru-based environmental activist
Disha Ravi's plea against the police allegedly leaking her private information to media channels.
A single-judge bench of Justice Rekha Palli questioned the Centre after its lawyer informed the court that due to the prevailing circumstances due to Covid-19, they weren't able to file a response in the matter within the time given at an earlier date.
After being apprised by the Centre's counsel, advocate Ajay Digpaul, of the same, Justice Palli remarked, " The affidavit has still not been filed despite last opportunity? What is the sanctity of last and final opportunity? Should I impose cost on you?"
The High Court had in March given the Centre a last opportunity to file a counter-affidavit in the matter.
Following this, the bench told the Centre and police to file their respective affidavits within a period of four weeks and adjourned the matter to August.
In an earlier hearing in the matter, the court had directed police not to leak any information pertaining to the investigation into the case where Ravi, along with Bombay-based lawyer Nikita Jacob and Shantanu Muluk, are accused of editing the toolkit in favour of the farmers' protest which was later shared by Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg on her Twitter handle.
The court had further directed that police shall abide by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Office Memorandum regarding "Advisory on Media Policy of Police" and ensure through an affidavit that material facts and investigation material shouldn't be leaked to the media from thereon.
Ravi, after being arrested in the case by the Special Cell, had moved a plea before the High Court, through advocate Abhinav Sekri, alleging that her private WhatsApp conversations were being leaked to media channels and sought a restrain by police to give out the same.
She also claimed in the plea that alleged disclosure statements made by her in police custody were being leaked in the public domain and were hence a violation of her privacy and right to a free and fair trial.
She was later granted bail by a Delhi court which noted that the evidence on record against her was "scanty" and "sketchy" and that there was no palpable reason to deny her bail.