Another Magistrate refuses to hear Bharti's plea amidst drama

High drama was on Wednesday witnessed in a Delhi court during the hearing of a case relating to AAP leader Somnath Bharti as an audio device was played by his counsel without permission inviting the ire of the magistrate who opted out of the case after the advocate objected to "longer" date.

New Delhi: High drama was on Wednesday witnessed in a Delhi court during the hearing of a case relating to AAP leader Somnath Bharti as an audio device was played by his counsel without permission inviting the ire of the magistrate who opted out of the case after the advocate objected to "longer" date.

Metropolitan Magistrate Ankita Lal refused to hear the plea of Bharti for registration of FIR against police for allegedly implicating him in a molestation case.

The case had come before the magistrate after it was transfered from the court of chief metropolitan magistrate (CMM) Vivek Kumar Gulia.

Ankita Lal, who wanted to hear the case in December, became the second Metropolitan Magistrate to refuse the matter after another Metropolitan Magistrate Niti Phutela had on November 3 recused herself from hearing Bharti's case over allegedly un-parliamentary language used by his counsel.

Before the commencemnet of the hearing in the case, Bharti's counsel Deepak Khosla had also moved a criminal defamation application against Metropolitan Magistrate Niti Phutela before the CMM who refused to hear it matter asking the lawyer to file the case in a regular course.

Soon after the magistrate was dictating her order after brief hearing of the case, Bharti's counsel took out an audio recorder device and started playing it in the court.

"Counsel had played the device without any prior permission of the court. Let this device be seized," the magistrate added in her order.

However, Bharti's counsel questioned that under what law can the device be seized and claimed to have permission of District and Sessions Judge R K Gauba and the CMM.

"Counsel for the accused has resisted the seizing of the device stating that the device is being used with prior permission of District and Sessions Judge R K Gauba and CMM but no such permission has been brought on record," the magistrate said.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. You can find out more by clicking this link

Close