38.6c New Delhi, India, Sunday, February 15, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Ashwini Upadhyay and three others in Judicial Custody while bail hearing continues [Read Order]

By Vivek Kumar      11 August, 2021 11:34 AM      0 Comments
Ashwini Upadhyay Judicial Custody colonial laws

Duty Ld. MM Court Judge Tanvi Khurana sent Ashwini Upadhyay and three others accused in the Jantar Mantar case to judicial custody of two days at 9 p.m. yesterday.

Online hearing of the case started yesterday after Police arrested Ashwini Upadhyay and 5 others in relation to the event that took place at Jantar Mantar on 8th August. It was not however disclosed by the police on what offenses were these arrests made.

The six arrestees were Upadhyay, Preet Singh, Vinod Sharma, Deepak Kumar, Vineet, and Deepak Singh Hindu. The FIR against them has been filed under sections 188, 268, 270, 153 (A) of IPC and 3 of Epidemic Act and 51(b) of Disaster Management Act.

The Public Prosecutor Anil Shrivastava moved an application for 14-day judicial custody for the accused Upadhyay, Preet Singh, Vinod Sharma and Deepak Kumar and 3-day Judicial Custody for Deepak Singh and Vineet.

Shrivastava argued that 14-day Judicial custody is required to prevent the accused persons from committing any further offence, for proper investigation and to prevent accused from tampering with evidence. The Judicial custody of 3 days for Deepak Singh and Vineet Bajpai was requested to unearth the conspiracy behind the incident and to get the mobile recovered.

Upadhyays lawyer Ashwani Dubey moved a bail application for Upadhyay. He also moved an application to seek a copy of the FIR. Upadhyays lawyer argued that a copy of the FIR registered against Upadhyay has not been handed to them yet.

Justice Tanvi Khurana passed orders for 24-hours custody for Deepak Singh and Vineet Bajpai. Upadhyay and others will be kept in Judicial custody for two days till the hearing of bail application will begin today. The accused will be presented before the court tomorrow.

Dubey, Upadhyays lawyer argued that Upadhyay was not related to the person sloganeering in the video in anyway. Upadhyay came, gave his speech and left at around 12:10 p.m. He further argued that the FIR registered by Police does not have Upadhyays name. In fact Upadhyay himself filed complaint against the people in the video to DCP. Upadhyay was neither the sponsor nor the organizer of the event.

Police arresting Upadhyay under the given circumstances proves that Police is misusing the powers bestowed on it by the draconian colonial era laws.  Police was present during the event, they have knowledge of when Ashwini ji came and left. They should investigate people in the video instead of arresting a law abiding, respected, social reformer and senior advocate, said Dube in an interview to the Law Street Journal.
 


Upadhyay was taken to the Tihar Jail at night. While speaking to the media, he urged people and lawyers to carry forward the movement he started.

We went to Jantar Mantar to demand change in the colonial laws. I was there only for 1 hour. I have connection to the people involved in the video. Despite that I am going to Tihar. I appeal to the lawyers of this country to carry forward this fight to oppose colonial laws and implement uniform civil code, uniform education

 

[Read Order] 



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

resignation-on-medical-grounds-attracts-forfeiture-of-pension-service-madras-hc-full-bench
Trending Judiciary
Resignation on Medical Grounds Attracts Forfeiture of Pension Service: Madras HC Full Bench [Read Order]

Madras High Court Full Bench rules resignation on medical grounds leads to forfeiture of past service under Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

09 February, 2026 12:16 PM
madras-hc-clarifies-section-37-of-ndps-act-not-applicable-to-acceptance-of-bond-for-appearance
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Clarifies: Section 37 of NDPS Act Not Applicable to Acceptance of Bond for Appearance [Read Order]

Madras High Court says Section 37 NDPS Act doesn’t apply to acceptance of bond for appearance on summons, as it is distinct from grant of bail.

09 February, 2026 12:20 PM
sc-refers-matter-to-larger-bench-to-resolve-conflicting-judgments-on-third-partys-right-under-under-order-ix-rule-13-cpc
Trending Judiciary
SC Refers Matter To Larger Bench To Resolve Conflicting Judgments On Third Party’s Right Under Under Order IX Rule 13 CPC [Read Order]

Supreme Court refers the issue of third party rights under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to a larger bench to resolve conflicting judgments on ex parte decrees.

09 February, 2026 12:35 PM
bombay-sessions-court-grants-bail-in-193-crore-cyber-fraud-case-reaffirms-bail-is-rule-jail-is-exception
Trending Judiciary
Bombay Sessions Court Grants Bail in ₹1.93 Crore Cyber Fraud Case, Reaffirms ‘Bail Is Rule, Jail Is Exception’ [Read Order]

Bombay Sessions Court grants bail in ₹1.93 crore cyber fraud case, citing right to liberty as investigation is complete and accused not direct beneficiary.

09 February, 2026 04:17 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email