Kumar Vishwas files quashing petition against Punjab before Punjab and Haryana High Court
Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, April 26
Describing himself as the founder member of Aam Aadmi Party, Kumar Vishwas on Tuesday moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court against the State of Punjab for quashing an FIR registered against him on the allegations of issuing provocative statements and other offences on April 12.
Among other things, Vishwas submitted that the FIR was not only “utter abuse of the process of law, but also apparent misuse of the state machinery to wreck vengeance against political opponents and amounts to unconstitutional attempt to breach the fundamental right to speech”.
The petition filed through counsel Mayank Aggarwal and Himanshu Gupta is expected to be argued by senior advocate Chetan Mittal. It is yet to be listed for hearing. Vishwas submitted that the FIR and the proceeding emanating from it were “mala fide”. The manner in which the investigating agency was proceeding made it apparent that it was trying to curtail his liberty “by adopting a procedure unknown to law”.
He said the allegations against him in the FIR were that he gave provocative statements against AAP’s national convener Arvind Kejriwal in interviews from February 16 to 19 alleging his involvement “with certain nefarious and anti-social elements”.
Vishwas submitted that it was alleged that the petitioner made provocative statements during the course of Vidhan Sabha election to create unrest and communal instability across Punjab. He submitted that the reading of the FIR made it clear that there was apparent mala fide intention and abuse of process of law. The FIR was registered at an “alien jurisdiction” at Ropar with oblique motive to settle political scores since the alleged statements/interviews were given in Mumbai, he submitted.
“The allegations levelled in the FIR even if taken on face value and accepted in entirety, though not admitted, do not prima facie constitute any offence against the petitioner under Sections 153, 153-A, 505, 505(2) and 116, read with 143, 147, 323, 341 and 120-B of the IPC and Section 125 of Representation of Peoples Act, 1951,” he added.
