The Delhi High Court on Thursday issued a notice on two more fresh petitions seeking quashing of additional FIR filed against foreign nationals, who are members of Tablighi Jamaat.
A bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhanbh asked the respondent, Delhi Police, to file a status report and prepare a consolidated chart for all FIRs against all Tablighi Jamaat members. The court issued a notice in two fresh quashing petitions arising out of FIRs registered at Police Station Sadar Bazar and Police Station Shastri Park.
The court listed the matter for further hearing on August 10.
Counsels Ashima Mandla and Mandakini Singh appeared for the foreign national Jamaatis. Advocate Mandla submitted that the foreign nationals were not informed of these additional FIRs before the Saket court, which was hearing the matter in connection with a congregation at Nizamuddin Markaz here.
The Delhi High Court had recently issued a notice on four separate petitions seeking quashing of additional FIR against various Jamaat foreigners.
The petitioners had told the court that the foreign nationals have been charged in these FIRs under the same sections as in FIR registered at Police station of crime branch in Markaz matter. Now, when the time for their deportation has come, they are unable to fly back due to additional FIRs, the petitioners said.
The petitioners have sought quashing of additional FIRs registered at the different police station under various sections of IPC and Epidemic Diseases Act.
In the case being probed by Crime Branch, the foreign national petitioners have duly entered plea bargaining and consequent deportation orders have been issued by the court.
The petitioners said that the FIRs before this court are similar to the FIR of Crime Branch, in which 911 of the 955 foreigner Jamaatis have concluded plea bargaining.
"Under the law, second FIR is impermissible and there is an operational bar from prosecution of same offences arising out of the corresponding cause of action under Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India (widely known as the doctrine of double jeopardy) as well as section 300 of the CrPC," the petitioners had said earlier.
( With inputs from ANI )