'‘This ends rule of law’: Police raid on Delhi riots advocate raises alarm bells among lawyers'
3 views
Skip to first unread message
Sukla Sen
Dec 26, 2020, 3:54:16 AM12/26/20
to foil-l, Say NO 2 UID Core Group
[Indian "democracy", together with "India", being progressively dismantled to yield place to a rising "Hindu Rashtra" - right before our own eyes.
Like the New Parliament Building pushing aside the "old"!?
The Parliament was convened, with the pandemic raging, to somehow extract a seal of approval - never mind "how", for the "controversial" three farm Bills.
With the pandemic abating, the Winter Session is blocked out, to dodge any two-way exchanges on the farm Acts thus enacted - triggering massive protests.
<<If the state can simply raid a lawyer fighting the state and access his communications with an accused person, what remains of the legal system?
...
Bhuwania points out the unprecedented nature of what this raid on Pracha represents: “We’ve had the Emergency, we’ve had situations like the fight against Naxals but I can’t recall if the state ever took such legal action before.”
Sekhri argues that not only was the Delhi Police at fault, so was a court that allowed this. “In fact, what makes it more worrying is that the police could actually have tried to ‘raid’ his office themselves but they got a warrant from a judge, who is designed to function as a check and figure out what is the purpose of the search,” he said.>>
(Excerpted from Sl. No. I. below.)
<<Responding to the allegations, Pracha told The Quint he had not concocted any statement. “The statement they are saying has been concocted has the sign of the complainant. The complainant is himself not denying that it is his signature. I have nothing against the complainant as I understand the pressure he might be under. Delhi Police is threatening victims to take their complaints back, that is the truth, nothing else. Their basic motive was them taking my hard disk and getting information on other cases.”>>
(Excerpted from Sl. No. II. below.)
<<A team of special cell sleuths had arrived at Pracha’s law firm, Legal Axis, in Delhi’s Nizamuddin East locality at around 12.30pm on December 24 and left the premises at 3am. Pracha told Outlook that the raiding party “hacked into our computers to access various records without telling us what they were downloading”. He said that the team “kept changing its demands and each time we would furnish details sought by them, the Investigating Officer who identified himself as Rajeev would go out to speak to someone on the phone and then return saying he wasn’t satisfied and wanted to look at more documents”.
Insisting that he cooperated with the police because “he wanted everyone to see how the Delhi police was trying to intimidate a lawyer and derail a case for justice” but said he “sensed something was terribly wrong when the IO was signing a document related to the raid.” Pracha alleged that “the IO had identified himself to us as Rajeev but he used some other name while signing the papers… this is when I realized that this was not a regular raid and I immediately asked my colleagues to call the local police and file a complaint against the raiding party”.>>
(Excerpted from Sl. No. III. below.)
And we can almost certainly guess what the Supreme Court would do, if approached.
In fact, a Constitutional Court is expected to take note of such (alleged) atrocious behaviour on the part of the Executive (aided by the subordinate judiciary), suo moto.
*When do we rise up and open our eyes!?*]
I/III.
https://scroll.in/article/982253/this-ends-rule-of-law-police-raid-on-delhi-riots-advocate-raises-alarm-bells-among-lawyers?
‘This ends rule of law’: Police raid on Delhi riots advocate raises alarm bells among lawyers
If the state can simply raid a lawyer fighting the state and access his communications with an accused person, what remains of the legal system?
Shoaib Daniyal
Yesterday · 01:04 pm
‘This ends rule of law’: Police raid on Delhi riots advocate raises alarm bells among lawyers
Mehmood Pracha's office being raided by the Delhi Police on December 24.
On Thursday, the Delhi Police’s Special Cell raided the office of Mehmood Pracha, a lawyer representing several people who are accused in the February Delhi riots.
The raid, which lasted for 15 hours, relates to alleged cases of fraud. This includes allegations that Pracha had forged signatures on a notarised document as well as instigated a man to depose falsely in a riots case, reported the Print.
The riots in February left 53 people dead, many injured and thousands more affected. They were the most serious Hindu-Muslim clashes in seven decades.
The drastic police action has raised serious questions among Indian lawyers about the breach of attorney-client privilege – the idea that communication between a person and his lawyer is confidential. By accessing computers used by Pracha, the Delhi Police can potentially access communication between Pracha and the clients he represents in the Delhi riots cases.
Compromising the law
“This action is deeply worrying as lawyer-client confidentiality is the bedrock of legal practice, especially for criminal defence lawyers,” explained Abhinav Sekhri, a lawyer practising in Delhi.
Anuj Bhuwania, a professor at OP Jindal Global University explains that this action strikes at the heart of rule of law in India: “If a lawyer fighting against the state can simply be raided by the state and his materials seized then really, it practically ends rule of law.”
Mumbai-based Yug Chaudhry raises similar concerns about the blow this raid strikes at India’s legal system. “This raises very serious concerns especially given the present climate where the government is persecuting dissenters,” he explained. “On top of that if the government then starts prosecuting lawyers since they are fighting for dissenters, the whole legal system which depends so heavily on lawyers will be severely compromised.”
Unprecedented
Bhuwania points out the unprecedented nature of what this raid on Pracha represents: “We’ve had the Emergency, we’ve had situations like the fight against Naxals but I can’t recall if the state ever took such legal action before.”
Sekhri argues that not only was the Delhi Police at fault, so was a court that allowed this. “In fact, what makes it more worrying is that the police could actually have tried to ‘raid’ his office themselves but they got a warrant from a judge, who is designed to function as a check and figure out what is the purpose of the search,” he said.
Illegal raid
Nikhil Mehra, a lawyer practising in Delhi identifies further legal gaps in the raid. “The warrant has been issued under Section 93 [of the Code Of Criminal Procedure], which only permits the “searching” of specified documents,” explained Mehra. “Those are the documents on the pretext of which the warrant would have been obtained in the first place. However by seizing the entire hard disk and meta data pertaining to all files, the police have violated the terms of the warrant. Over and above the breach of the terms of the warrant, this will also obviously cause a breach of the attorney client privilege in relation to other cases too, which are not the subject matter of the warrant.”
In a video of the raid, Pracha is seen making a similar point: “As per the order from the judge, you can’t seize [my computers] but you can look [at my emails].”
However, the policeman insists that he must seize Pracha’s hard drives.
Advocate @MehmoodPracha raided by Delhi Police. Pracha is a leading lawyer in many of the Delhi Riots cases. pic.twitter.com/PnjQJdwKWD
— Fatima Khan (@khanthefatima) December 24, 2020
II/III.
https://www.thequint.com/news/india/delhi-riots-advocate-mehmood-pracha-patiala-house-court-allegations?utm_campaign
Delhi Riots Advocate Pracha Moves Court, Responds to Allegations
The allegation against Mehmood Pracha is that he created a fabricated complaint for a victim of the Delhi violence.
AISHWARYA S IYER ADITYA MENON
Updated: 25 Dec 2020, 10:12 PM IST
INDIA
3 min read
The allegation against Mehmood Pracha is that he created a fabricated complaint for a victim of the Delhi violence.
Advocate Mehmood Pracha, one of the lawyers representing several victims and accused in the Delhi riots cases, including UAPA accused Gulfisha Fatima, moved Patiala House Court after his office was raided by Delhi Police special cell for 15-hours straight on 24 and 25 December.
He moved the court to ask for a copy of the videography of the entire search conducted by Delhi Police special cell, that he told the court he was entitled to. Duty Magistrate Anshul Singhal asked Delhi Police to file its response to the plea by December 27. In the copy of the order, accessed by The Quint, Pracha also told the court that he was threatened by the investigating officer and one Mr Rajiv that they will file a false case against him. “Accordingly, the applicant (Pracha) has filed an application for continuous monitoring of the case,” the order reads.
Also Read
Special Cell Searches Delhi Riot Lawyer Mehmood Pracha’s Office
Special Cell Searches Delhi Riot Lawyer Mehmood Pracha’s Office
The Allegations Against Mehmood Pracha, and His Response
In a press note issued by Deputy Commissioner of Police from Delhi Police Special Cell Manishi Chandra, details of the searches conducted at advocate Mehmood Pracha’s office have been revealed. While there are two allegations raised in the release under FIR 212/2020 dated 22 August, one is against Pracha and one is against advocate Javed Ali. The one against Pracha is regarding him creating a concocted/fabricated complaint for a victim of the northeast Delhi riots, the one against Ali is about him using forged notary stamps.
The allegation against Pracha is regarding a victim of the northeast Delhi riots called Irshad Ali, who was allegedly made to depose falsely in front of the court. “These findings were supported by the witnesses of this case who had recorded their testimonies under Section 164 of CrPC before the concerned Hon’ble Courts,” the report read.
Ali, whose shop was allegedly burnt and looted during the northeast Delhi riots, told the court that he could not identify the accused named in his complaint as he did not know who the people were. This happened in August 2020, after which the additional sessions judge Vinod Yadav directed the police to investigate the allegations, pass appropriate directions and requested the Delhi Commissioner of Police look into the matter.
In the police report from August 2020, they had explained the matter to the judge. The report stated, "During the investigation, he (Ali) was enquired about the names of Deepak, Navneet and Mintu, as mentioned in his complaint. He said that he knows them by their names and does not know anything about them personally. He also stated that he does not identify the accused persons in the video."
PTI reported how the police report included Ali’s brother, Dilshad statement as well. Dilshad had said they both were home when they got the call about the shop being looted and hence had not seen anyone looting their shop, contrary to the complaint submitted in his brother’s name.
Responding to the allegations, Pracha told The Quint he had not concocted any statement. “The statement they are saying has been concocted has the sign of the complainant. The complainant is himself not denying that it is his signature. I have nothing against the complainant as I understand the pressure he might be under. Delhi Police is threatening victims to take their complaints back, that is the truth, nothing else. Their basic motive was them taking my hard disk and getting information on other cases.”
‘Concern About Breaching Attorney-Client Privilege’
During the raid Pracha’s colleague had told The Quint that them seizing material from Pracha’s laptops was against basic ethics for a practising lawyer, “We told them we can not let them take our computers as this would be against client-attorney privilege. We said this was our right and we are also bound by ethics. The police then used their pen drives, plugged it to three computers in the office and took material. We have no idea what they took from us. They are not letting us touch anything either.”
A day later and Pracha says he does not know what the police has taken and what they have not. “I do not know what information they have got or not. They had two hackers with them and broke my main computer. We will have to call in our experts and see what they have taken and what they have not.”
“My clients are calling me and asking if my data is safe or not, they will also make complaints. I am also appearing for senior officers, some matrimonial issues etc. These are highly sensitive cases,” he said adding that he has been exposed to breaching confidentiality with his clients due to this.
Published: 25 Dec 2020, 10:06 PM IST
III.
https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/india-news-i-was-assaulted-by-cops-my-clients-told-that-i-will-be-jailed-or-encountered-mehmood-pracha/368358
I Was Assaulted By Cops, My Clients Threatened: Delhi Riots Lawyer Mehmood Pracha
Speaking to Outlook, Pracha said the police team assaulted him and some of his colleagues when the raids 'failed to give them what they had hoped to discover'
Puneet Nicholas Yadav
25 December 2020
I Was Assaulted By Cops, My Clients Threatened: Delhi Riots Lawyer Mehmood Pracha
Mehmood Pracha
@MehmoodPracha/ Twitter
Also read
Mysterious Ghost Informer Behind Arrest Of Safoora Zargar, Others In Delhi Riot Cases, Truth A Casualty
A day after the Delhi Police’s special cell carried out a near 15-hour-long raid at his office, lawyer Mehmood Pracha, who is appearing as counsel for defence in several cases linked to the February 2020 Northeast Delhi riots, has leveled serious allegations against the police. Speaking to Outlook, Pracha said the police team assaulted him and some of his colleagues when the raids “failed to give them what they had hoped to discover”.
A team of special cell sleuths had arrived at Pracha’s law firm, Legal Axis, in Delhi’s Nizamuddin East locality at around 12.30pm on December 24 and left the premises at 3am. Pracha told Outlook that the raiding party “hacked into our computers to access various records without telling us what they were downloading”. He said that the team “kept changing its demands and each time we would furnish details sought by them, the Investigating Officer who identified himself as Rajeev would go out to speak to someone on the phone and then return saying he wasn’t satisfied and wanted to look at more documents”.
Insisting that he cooperated with the police because “he wanted everyone to see how the Delhi police was trying to intimidate a lawyer and derail a case for justice” but said he “sensed something was terribly wrong when the IO was signing a document related to the raid.” Pracha alleged that “the IO had identified himself to us as Rajeev but he used some other name while signing the papers… this is when I realized that this was not a regular raid and I immediately asked my colleagues to call the local police and file a complaint against the raiding party”.
The lawyer alleged that “there were at least two people who had come with the special cell team who we later found out were not from the Delhi police but were possibly civilians… when we tried to question them, they ran away.” Pracha says that he let the raid continue after he spoke to a senior police officer who assured him that “though the man who identified himself as the IO wasn’t the investigating officer, he was part of the special cell.”
The search warrant against Pracha, issued by a local Delhi court, on December 22, against FIR 212/2020 read: “It has been made to appear to me that incriminating documents comprising false complaint and meta-data of outbox of email account which was used to send incriminating documents are essential to the investigation of FIR NO. 212/20 of Police station special cell, New Delhi… This is to authorize and require investigating officer of this case to search for the said incriminating documents and meta-data of outbox of email ID, wherever they may be found whether in computer or in the office/premises of Sh Mehmood Pracha.”
The police had initially told Pracha that they only wanted “three documents” but soon after the raid began, the IO insisted on seizing his laptop and other office computers. “I told the team that they do not have the legal permission to seize my laptop. I am also bound by attorney-client privilege under the Evidence Act and cannot divulge or allow police to access records that have the potential to break the confidence of my clients. I told the team that they are free to look at our laptops and computers but they can’t seize them,” Pracha said.
The Delhi court, which had ordered a probe against Pracha on allegations that he falsified an affidavit and tutored some witnesses and victims in the Northeast Delhi riots cases, had also told the police that the raid at his office must be videographed. “Since the police are duty bound to fully comply with the orders in the search warrant, they had to videograph the raid. I only hope that they police do not doctor the video records because the full videography of the raid will show that everything I am saying is the truth… this raid was carried out in complete violation of the law and its intention was not to serve justice but to bury it.”
Pracha also alleged that the police have been calling up some of his clients in the riots cases and threatening them to withdraw the cases. “They are telling my clients that we will put your lawyer in jail or encounter him if needed… where will you go then,” Pracha told Outlook. The lawyer said that he isn’t “disturbed by the police’s conduct simply because this has happened to me or in a sensitive case but because of the trend of unabashed abuse of power that the raid signifies”. He added that “if the police are allowed to intimidate lawyers in this manner, no lawyer in this country will be safe and it won’t be limited to just cases that are politically or socially sensitive… tomorrow if a person complains against a police officer or even files a civil dispute against some local strongman, the police will simply barge into the office of his or her lawyer and seize documents or evidence that are crucial to winning the case; the Evidence Act, the attorney-client privilege, fair investigation will all be a thing of the past if such raids are allowed to continue.”
The Northeast Delhi riots cases are only one set of politically sensitive matters that Pracha, who identifies himself as an Ambedkarite and a civil rights lawyer, has taken up in his long legal career. He had also appeared in the past for Bhim Army’s Chandrashekhar Azad ‘Ravan’ and in several other matters related to communal and caste-based targeting of different individuals and communities. He told Outlook that he is “not going to back down from his fight for justice for the marginalized and will continue to take up causes that are necessary to uphold and strengthen the spirit of Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Constitution.”
-- Like the New Parliament Building pushing aside the "old"!?
The Parliament was convened, with the pandemic raging, to somehow extract a seal of approval - never mind "how", for the "controversial" three farm Bills.
With the pandemic abating, the Winter Session is blocked out, to dodge any two-way exchanges on the farm Acts thus enacted - triggering massive protests.
<<If the state can simply raid a lawyer fighting the state and access his communications with an accused person, what remains of the legal system?
...
Bhuwania points out the unprecedented nature of what this raid on Pracha represents: “We’ve had the Emergency, we’ve had situations like the fight against Naxals but I can’t recall if the state ever took such legal action before.”
Sekhri argues that not only was the Delhi Police at fault, so was a court that allowed this. “In fact, what makes it more worrying is that the police could actually have tried to ‘raid’ his office themselves but they got a warrant from a judge, who is designed to function as a check and figure out what is the purpose of the search,” he said.>>
(Excerpted from Sl. No. I. below.)
<<Responding to the allegations, Pracha told The Quint he had not concocted any statement. “The statement they are saying has been concocted has the sign of the complainant. The complainant is himself not denying that it is his signature. I have nothing against the complainant as I understand the pressure he might be under. Delhi Police is threatening victims to take their complaints back, that is the truth, nothing else. Their basic motive was them taking my hard disk and getting information on other cases.”>>
(Excerpted from Sl. No. II. below.)
<<A team of special cell sleuths had arrived at Pracha’s law firm, Legal Axis, in Delhi’s Nizamuddin East locality at around 12.30pm on December 24 and left the premises at 3am. Pracha told Outlook that the raiding party “hacked into our computers to access various records without telling us what they were downloading”. He said that the team “kept changing its demands and each time we would furnish details sought by them, the Investigating Officer who identified himself as Rajeev would go out to speak to someone on the phone and then return saying he wasn’t satisfied and wanted to look at more documents”.
Insisting that he cooperated with the police because “he wanted everyone to see how the Delhi police was trying to intimidate a lawyer and derail a case for justice” but said he “sensed something was terribly wrong when the IO was signing a document related to the raid.” Pracha alleged that “the IO had identified himself to us as Rajeev but he used some other name while signing the papers… this is when I realized that this was not a regular raid and I immediately asked my colleagues to call the local police and file a complaint against the raiding party”.>>
(Excerpted from Sl. No. III. below.)
And we can almost certainly guess what the Supreme Court would do, if approached.
In fact, a Constitutional Court is expected to take note of such (alleged) atrocious behaviour on the part of the Executive (aided by the subordinate judiciary), suo moto.
*When do we rise up and open our eyes!?*]
I/III.
https://scroll.in/article/982253/this-ends-rule-of-law-police-raid-on-delhi-riots-advocate-raises-alarm-bells-among-lawyers?
‘This ends rule of law’: Police raid on Delhi riots advocate raises alarm bells among lawyers
If the state can simply raid a lawyer fighting the state and access his communications with an accused person, what remains of the legal system?
Shoaib Daniyal
Yesterday · 01:04 pm
‘This ends rule of law’: Police raid on Delhi riots advocate raises alarm bells among lawyers
Mehmood Pracha's office being raided by the Delhi Police on December 24.
On Thursday, the Delhi Police’s Special Cell raided the office of Mehmood Pracha, a lawyer representing several people who are accused in the February Delhi riots.
The raid, which lasted for 15 hours, relates to alleged cases of fraud. This includes allegations that Pracha had forged signatures on a notarised document as well as instigated a man to depose falsely in a riots case, reported the Print.
The riots in February left 53 people dead, many injured and thousands more affected. They were the most serious Hindu-Muslim clashes in seven decades.
The drastic police action has raised serious questions among Indian lawyers about the breach of attorney-client privilege – the idea that communication between a person and his lawyer is confidential. By accessing computers used by Pracha, the Delhi Police can potentially access communication between Pracha and the clients he represents in the Delhi riots cases.
Compromising the law
“This action is deeply worrying as lawyer-client confidentiality is the bedrock of legal practice, especially for criminal defence lawyers,” explained Abhinav Sekhri, a lawyer practising in Delhi.
Anuj Bhuwania, a professor at OP Jindal Global University explains that this action strikes at the heart of rule of law in India: “If a lawyer fighting against the state can simply be raided by the state and his materials seized then really, it practically ends rule of law.”
Mumbai-based Yug Chaudhry raises similar concerns about the blow this raid strikes at India’s legal system. “This raises very serious concerns especially given the present climate where the government is persecuting dissenters,” he explained. “On top of that if the government then starts prosecuting lawyers since they are fighting for dissenters, the whole legal system which depends so heavily on lawyers will be severely compromised.”
Unprecedented
Bhuwania points out the unprecedented nature of what this raid on Pracha represents: “We’ve had the Emergency, we’ve had situations like the fight against Naxals but I can’t recall if the state ever took such legal action before.”
Sekhri argues that not only was the Delhi Police at fault, so was a court that allowed this. “In fact, what makes it more worrying is that the police could actually have tried to ‘raid’ his office themselves but they got a warrant from a judge, who is designed to function as a check and figure out what is the purpose of the search,” he said.
Illegal raid
Nikhil Mehra, a lawyer practising in Delhi identifies further legal gaps in the raid. “The warrant has been issued under Section 93 [of the Code Of Criminal Procedure], which only permits the “searching” of specified documents,” explained Mehra. “Those are the documents on the pretext of which the warrant would have been obtained in the first place. However by seizing the entire hard disk and meta data pertaining to all files, the police have violated the terms of the warrant. Over and above the breach of the terms of the warrant, this will also obviously cause a breach of the attorney client privilege in relation to other cases too, which are not the subject matter of the warrant.”
In a video of the raid, Pracha is seen making a similar point: “As per the order from the judge, you can’t seize [my computers] but you can look [at my emails].”
However, the policeman insists that he must seize Pracha’s hard drives.
Advocate @MehmoodPracha raided by Delhi Police. Pracha is a leading lawyer in many of the Delhi Riots cases. pic.twitter.com/PnjQJdwKWD
— Fatima Khan (@khanthefatima) December 24, 2020
II/III.
https://www.thequint.com/news/india/delhi-riots-advocate-mehmood-pracha-patiala-house-court-allegations?utm_campaign
Delhi Riots Advocate Pracha Moves Court, Responds to Allegations
The allegation against Mehmood Pracha is that he created a fabricated complaint for a victim of the Delhi violence.
AISHWARYA S IYER ADITYA MENON
Updated: 25 Dec 2020, 10:12 PM IST
INDIA
3 min read
The allegation against Mehmood Pracha is that he created a fabricated complaint for a victim of the Delhi violence.
Advocate Mehmood Pracha, one of the lawyers representing several victims and accused in the Delhi riots cases, including UAPA accused Gulfisha Fatima, moved Patiala House Court after his office was raided by Delhi Police special cell for 15-hours straight on 24 and 25 December.
He moved the court to ask for a copy of the videography of the entire search conducted by Delhi Police special cell, that he told the court he was entitled to. Duty Magistrate Anshul Singhal asked Delhi Police to file its response to the plea by December 27. In the copy of the order, accessed by The Quint, Pracha also told the court that he was threatened by the investigating officer and one Mr Rajiv that they will file a false case against him. “Accordingly, the applicant (Pracha) has filed an application for continuous monitoring of the case,” the order reads.
Also Read
Special Cell Searches Delhi Riot Lawyer Mehmood Pracha’s Office
Special Cell Searches Delhi Riot Lawyer Mehmood Pracha’s Office
The Allegations Against Mehmood Pracha, and His Response
In a press note issued by Deputy Commissioner of Police from Delhi Police Special Cell Manishi Chandra, details of the searches conducted at advocate Mehmood Pracha’s office have been revealed. While there are two allegations raised in the release under FIR 212/2020 dated 22 August, one is against Pracha and one is against advocate Javed Ali. The one against Pracha is regarding him creating a concocted/fabricated complaint for a victim of the northeast Delhi riots, the one against Ali is about him using forged notary stamps.
The allegation against Pracha is regarding a victim of the northeast Delhi riots called Irshad Ali, who was allegedly made to depose falsely in front of the court. “These findings were supported by the witnesses of this case who had recorded their testimonies under Section 164 of CrPC before the concerned Hon’ble Courts,” the report read.
Ali, whose shop was allegedly burnt and looted during the northeast Delhi riots, told the court that he could not identify the accused named in his complaint as he did not know who the people were. This happened in August 2020, after which the additional sessions judge Vinod Yadav directed the police to investigate the allegations, pass appropriate directions and requested the Delhi Commissioner of Police look into the matter.
In the police report from August 2020, they had explained the matter to the judge. The report stated, "During the investigation, he (Ali) was enquired about the names of Deepak, Navneet and Mintu, as mentioned in his complaint. He said that he knows them by their names and does not know anything about them personally. He also stated that he does not identify the accused persons in the video."
PTI reported how the police report included Ali’s brother, Dilshad statement as well. Dilshad had said they both were home when they got the call about the shop being looted and hence had not seen anyone looting their shop, contrary to the complaint submitted in his brother’s name.
Responding to the allegations, Pracha told The Quint he had not concocted any statement. “The statement they are saying has been concocted has the sign of the complainant. The complainant is himself not denying that it is his signature. I have nothing against the complainant as I understand the pressure he might be under. Delhi Police is threatening victims to take their complaints back, that is the truth, nothing else. Their basic motive was them taking my hard disk and getting information on other cases.”
‘Concern About Breaching Attorney-Client Privilege’
During the raid Pracha’s colleague had told The Quint that them seizing material from Pracha’s laptops was against basic ethics for a practising lawyer, “We told them we can not let them take our computers as this would be against client-attorney privilege. We said this was our right and we are also bound by ethics. The police then used their pen drives, plugged it to three computers in the office and took material. We have no idea what they took from us. They are not letting us touch anything either.”
A day later and Pracha says he does not know what the police has taken and what they have not. “I do not know what information they have got or not. They had two hackers with them and broke my main computer. We will have to call in our experts and see what they have taken and what they have not.”
“My clients are calling me and asking if my data is safe or not, they will also make complaints. I am also appearing for senior officers, some matrimonial issues etc. These are highly sensitive cases,” he said adding that he has been exposed to breaching confidentiality with his clients due to this.
Published: 25 Dec 2020, 10:06 PM IST
III.
https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/india-news-i-was-assaulted-by-cops-my-clients-told-that-i-will-be-jailed-or-encountered-mehmood-pracha/368358
I Was Assaulted By Cops, My Clients Threatened: Delhi Riots Lawyer Mehmood Pracha
Speaking to Outlook, Pracha said the police team assaulted him and some of his colleagues when the raids 'failed to give them what they had hoped to discover'
Puneet Nicholas Yadav
25 December 2020
I Was Assaulted By Cops, My Clients Threatened: Delhi Riots Lawyer Mehmood Pracha
Mehmood Pracha
@MehmoodPracha/ Twitter
Also read
Mysterious Ghost Informer Behind Arrest Of Safoora Zargar, Others In Delhi Riot Cases, Truth A Casualty
A day after the Delhi Police’s special cell carried out a near 15-hour-long raid at his office, lawyer Mehmood Pracha, who is appearing as counsel for defence in several cases linked to the February 2020 Northeast Delhi riots, has leveled serious allegations against the police. Speaking to Outlook, Pracha said the police team assaulted him and some of his colleagues when the raids “failed to give them what they had hoped to discover”.
A team of special cell sleuths had arrived at Pracha’s law firm, Legal Axis, in Delhi’s Nizamuddin East locality at around 12.30pm on December 24 and left the premises at 3am. Pracha told Outlook that the raiding party “hacked into our computers to access various records without telling us what they were downloading”. He said that the team “kept changing its demands and each time we would furnish details sought by them, the Investigating Officer who identified himself as Rajeev would go out to speak to someone on the phone and then return saying he wasn’t satisfied and wanted to look at more documents”.
Insisting that he cooperated with the police because “he wanted everyone to see how the Delhi police was trying to intimidate a lawyer and derail a case for justice” but said he “sensed something was terribly wrong when the IO was signing a document related to the raid.” Pracha alleged that “the IO had identified himself to us as Rajeev but he used some other name while signing the papers… this is when I realized that this was not a regular raid and I immediately asked my colleagues to call the local police and file a complaint against the raiding party”.
The lawyer alleged that “there were at least two people who had come with the special cell team who we later found out were not from the Delhi police but were possibly civilians… when we tried to question them, they ran away.” Pracha says that he let the raid continue after he spoke to a senior police officer who assured him that “though the man who identified himself as the IO wasn’t the investigating officer, he was part of the special cell.”
The search warrant against Pracha, issued by a local Delhi court, on December 22, against FIR 212/2020 read: “It has been made to appear to me that incriminating documents comprising false complaint and meta-data of outbox of email account which was used to send incriminating documents are essential to the investigation of FIR NO. 212/20 of Police station special cell, New Delhi… This is to authorize and require investigating officer of this case to search for the said incriminating documents and meta-data of outbox of email ID, wherever they may be found whether in computer or in the office/premises of Sh Mehmood Pracha.”
The police had initially told Pracha that they only wanted “three documents” but soon after the raid began, the IO insisted on seizing his laptop and other office computers. “I told the team that they do not have the legal permission to seize my laptop. I am also bound by attorney-client privilege under the Evidence Act and cannot divulge or allow police to access records that have the potential to break the confidence of my clients. I told the team that they are free to look at our laptops and computers but they can’t seize them,” Pracha said.
The Delhi court, which had ordered a probe against Pracha on allegations that he falsified an affidavit and tutored some witnesses and victims in the Northeast Delhi riots cases, had also told the police that the raid at his office must be videographed. “Since the police are duty bound to fully comply with the orders in the search warrant, they had to videograph the raid. I only hope that they police do not doctor the video records because the full videography of the raid will show that everything I am saying is the truth… this raid was carried out in complete violation of the law and its intention was not to serve justice but to bury it.”
Pracha also alleged that the police have been calling up some of his clients in the riots cases and threatening them to withdraw the cases. “They are telling my clients that we will put your lawyer in jail or encounter him if needed… where will you go then,” Pracha told Outlook. The lawyer said that he isn’t “disturbed by the police’s conduct simply because this has happened to me or in a sensitive case but because of the trend of unabashed abuse of power that the raid signifies”. He added that “if the police are allowed to intimidate lawyers in this manner, no lawyer in this country will be safe and it won’t be limited to just cases that are politically or socially sensitive… tomorrow if a person complains against a police officer or even files a civil dispute against some local strongman, the police will simply barge into the office of his or her lawyer and seize documents or evidence that are crucial to winning the case; the Evidence Act, the attorney-client privilege, fair investigation will all be a thing of the past if such raids are allowed to continue.”
The Northeast Delhi riots cases are only one set of politically sensitive matters that Pracha, who identifies himself as an Ambedkarite and a civil rights lawyer, has taken up in his long legal career. He had also appeared in the past for Bhim Army’s Chandrashekhar Azad ‘Ravan’ and in several other matters related to communal and caste-based targeting of different individuals and communities. He told Outlook that he is “not going to back down from his fight for justice for the marginalized and will continue to take up causes that are necessary to uphold and strengthen the spirit of Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Constitution.”
Peace Is Doable
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages