The administration of the Union Territory of Chandigarh has moved the Supreme Court to challenge a 2024 order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The high court had set aside a criminal case against several leaders of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), including Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, relating to a 2020 protest in Chandigarh.
Key Developments
- The Supreme Court bench headed by CJI Surya Kant adjourned the hearing to give the Union time to file petitions concerning other accused.
- The High Court held that no prima facie case existed; it quashed the FIR and chargesheet under IPC sections 147, 149, 332 and 353.
- The Court observed that the petitioners were not linked to any specific words, gestures or instigation that could be attributed to the stone‑throwing by the mob.
- It noted the absence of a prohibitory order under Section 144 CrPC, meaning the assembly could not be deemed unlawful.
Important Facts
The FIR was lodged in 2020 after a complaint by L/C Manpreet Kaur, alleging that AAP leaders incited 750‑800 workers to march towards the Punjab Chief Minister’s residence. Police at the barricades reported that the crowd became aggressive, attempted to breach the barriers and, after water was sprayed, began pelting stones. Injuries to police were minor, as reflected in Medico‑Legal Reports.
The chargesheet itself admitted that many participants, including the petitioners, were yet to be identified for a supplementary challan, underscoring the lack of concrete evidence linking the leaders to the alleged offences.
Exam Relevance
This case illustrates the interplay between federal institutions (the Union Territory administration, the Supreme Court, and the High Court) and political parties. It highlights procedural aspects of criminal law such as filing of FIRs, the role of a chargesheet, and the standards for establishing prima facie evidence. Understanding provisions like