Whatever it is, it is way too much — if this report of proceedings in the Delhi High Court quotes accurately.
The ASG opposed Sibal’s defence and said if “he (Kanhaiya) is allowed on bail in this kind of offence, the future generation of this country will be infected”.
“It is a very delicate situation. There appears to be a movement and this is beginning of the movement. We have to see who’ financed it,” ASG submitted, adding that if Kanhaiya is released, it can have pan India impact.
“Releasing Kanhaiya can be point for anti-India movement,” ASG said, adding that “similar slogans were raised in Jadavpur university after JNU. If he is given bail then such incidents will get a boost”.
“If Kanhaiya is allowed on bail in this kind of offence…” — which kind of offense would that be? The kind for which you said there is no proof? The kind which according to your own police report was committed by someone else who you never bothered to catch? How precisely are the future generations of this country going to be affected if someone who is not demonstrably guilty of the crime charged to his account is let free?
“There appears to be a movement and this is the beginning of the movement” — True. There is a movement against the Delhi Police, in collusion with the ruling party (whose MP filed the FIR) and various media houses (who supplied dodgy footage) using the law and the courts to target a young student guilty of nothing more than trying to break up a potential inflammable situation (which the cops present on site did nothing about, by the way).
“If Kanhaiya is released it can have a pan-India impact”. Oh, and what kind of impact do you think there is going to be if you admit in court that you have no evidence but you are going to keep him in jail anyway?
“Releasing Kanhaiya can be point for anti-India movement” — immediately contradicted by the next part of that sentence. The Jadavpur incident happened because you falsely arrested someone — had you left a campus affair to campus authorities to resolve, none of this would have happened.
Seriously — how much does Tushar Mehta get paid for spouting arguments that would be laughed at even at the level of a high school debate?
The line that cracks you up? Mehta’s plaintive lament that “He is denying his role”.
No shit, Sherlock?! An accused is saying he didn’t do the crime? How shocking — particularly when you seem to have nothing to show that he did.