New Delhi: Delhi High Court to consider media’s plea seeking rules for criminal reporting and ‘sensationalizing’ the trial of wrestler and Olympic medalist Sushil Kumar in the death of a 23-year-old man Refused on Friday. Saying that a PIL cannot be filed for a “cautious person”.
A bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh said that the petition has been filed on behalf of a “vigilante” – Kumar – claiming that the media has defamed him with his report of a murder case in which he Is an accused.
“You cannot file a PIL for a person. We see no reason to consider a case on behalf of a vigilante person,” the court said and disposed of the petition of a law student.

The law student had alleged that Kumar’s career and reputation had been damaged by the media’s reporting of the case against him in connection with the Chhatrasal Stadium controversy, which led to the death of the 23-year-old wrestler.
On May 23, a Delhi court remanded Kumar in 6 days of police custody for questioning in the murder of a fellow wrestler, saying that the charges against him are of a serious nature and no one is above the law. .
Kumar and his associates allegedly assaulted wrestler Sagar Dhankhar (23) and his two friends Sonu and Amit Kumar at the Chhatrasal Stadium here on the intervening night of May 4 and 5.
Kumar was arrested along with co-accused Ajay from Mundka in outer Delhi on 23 May. The two-time Olympic medalist was absconding for nearly three weeks.

Allowing the police to interrogate Kumar for six days, the magistrate had said, “No one is above the law and the law treats everyone equally. Our constitution is subject to exceptions to the right to life and liberty to all persons Guarantees. Charges against accused persons are grave in nature. ”
Delhi Police has sections 302 (murder), 308 (non-intentional murder), 365 (kidnapping), 325 (causing serious injury), 323 (voluntarily injuring), 341 (wrongfully restraining) and 506 (criminal) in the case. Has filed an FIR under Threat of Indian Penal Code (IPC)).
FIRs were also registered under sections 188 (disobedience of order by public servant), 269 (likely to spread infection of the disease by negligence), 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 34 (common intention) of IPC and various sections of Arms Act. was. .


Read More Sports News

Keep Reading Latest Breaking News

Source link