Parliament security breach case: Delhi High Court seeks police reply on bail plea

The Delhi High Court on Monday sought police's response on a bail plea filed in the December 2023 Parliament security breach case.

A bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Manoj Jain issued notice to the police on the bail plea of accused Lalit Jha in the case and posted the matter for October 8.

Jha challenged a trial court's April 28 order rejecting his bail plea.


He claimed of surrendering on December 15, 2023 and spending 1.8 years in custody since then.

"At the current stage the case is at the stage of arguments on charge and the compliance of Section 207 CrPC. It is also relevant to mention here that in the case there are 133 witnesses in the main chargesheet. However, no single member of Parliament has been enlisted in the list of witnesses," his plea said.

Jha further argued no harm or injury or loss of property happened to the members.

He claimed the trial court was wrong in not considering the "true facts and circumstances" while dismissing his bail plea.

In a major security breach on the anniversary of the 2001 Parliament terror attack, accused Sagar Sharma and Manoranjan D allegedly jumped into the Lok Sabha chamber from the public gallery during Zero Hour, released yellow gas from canisters and sloganeered before they were overpowered by some MPs.

Around the same time, two other accused -- Amol Shinde and Neelam Azad -- allegedly sprayed coloured gas from canisters while shouting "tanashahi nahi chalegi (dictatorship won't work)" outside Parliament premises.

The high court in July granted bail to co-accused Azad and one Mahesh Kumawat.

The trial court had noted that all the accused persons - Azad, Manoranjan D, Sharma, Amol Dhanraj Shinde, Jha and Kumawat -- already knew about the threat given by designated terrorist Gurpatwant Singh Pannu for targeting Parliament on December 13, 2023.

While four accused were taken into custody from the spot, Jha and Kumawat were arrested later.

The prosecution alleged Jha "subscribed, believed, contributed and participated" in the criminal act, guided by their individual needs of fame, wealth and recognition.

Calling Jha a conspirator, the prosecution said he recorded a video outside Parliament house's gates 2 and 3 for wider dissemination to national and international media houses.