Ishrat Jahan alleged that he has been facing harassment in prison for the past four months. (Archive)
New Delhi:
Former Congressional Councilor Ishrat Jahan, arrested under the strict Illegal Activities (Prevention) Act in a case of riots in northeast Delhi, alleged in court in Delhi on Tuesday that she was beaten by inmates at Mandoli Prison and was facing continuously to harassment in jail.
Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat ordered the prison authorities to take immediate steps to ensure Ms. Jahan’s safety and to ensure that she was not further harassed for presenting her complaints to the court.
The court requested a detailed report from the prison authorities on Wednesday on the measures that have been taken to address the problem and also to indicate whether it was necessary to transfer her to another prison.
When the judge asked the Deputy Superintendent of Mandoli Jail if such an incident had occurred, she confirmed it and said that the necessary action had been taken.
At this, the judge told the prison official: “She (Jahan) appears to be in a state of utter fear. Please speak to her immediately and understand the situation. Please submit a detailed report on the measures taken to alleviate his apprehension and his fear.
“Take all necessary action. Take immediate action. I don’t want to hear that the defendant was further harassed by her inmates or anyone else because she complained. I don’t want to hear that the defendant present was harmed in any way.”
He also ordered prison authorities to present her in court on Wednesday via video conference.
While making presentations directly to the court, Ms Jahan said it was the second incident in a month and she was under immense stress due to ongoing physical and verbal harassment.
“This is the second incident in a month. This morning at 6:30 am, (the inmates) beat me hard and verbally abused me. One of the inmates even cut off his hand so that they could punish me for a complaint False. Fortunately, the jail officials did not listen to them. I have also filed a written complaint. They keep calling me a terrorist. They also demanded money from me in the dining room, “Ms. Jahan alleged.
Furthermore, she alleged that she has been facing harassment in jail for the past four months and that she had requested to be transferred to Tihar Prison, but was rejected due to the current COVID-19 pandemic.
Lawyer Pradeep Teotia, who appeared on behalf of Ms. Jahan, further alleged that her inmates previously beat her as well, and then one of the inmates was transferred to another prison.
“One of the inmates beat her a lot previously. A complaint was filed with the Deputy Superintendent and that inmate was transferred to another jail. There are two ladies in her cell who beat her today. As she offered her morning prayers, they objected and began to abuse her and beat her, “Teotia alleged.
Lawyer Misbah Bin Tariq, who was also present at the hearing, requested the court to take immediate action and to consider her situation urgently as Ms Jahan was a member of the bar association.
Ms. Jahan further said that she suffered from a medical condition for which she was not taken to a hospital or tested.
Counsel Rizwan, who appeared on behalf of co-defendant and suspended AAP counselor Tahir Hussain, stated that most defendants in the riot cases in northeast Delhi faced discrimination in prison, either by the inmates or prison authorities.
Furthermore, it alleged that the accused had been declared “terrorists” before the conclusion of the trial.
“Almost all defendants face discrimination in prison. They have been declared terrorists before the conclusion of the trial. Prison authorities behave adversely towards them. Proper monitoring by the court is important in cases, especially in the conspiracy case in which the defendants have been booked under the UAP Act, “he said.
To this, the judge said: “A defendant is a defendant, not a convict.”
Another defendant in the case, Jamia Millia Islamia’s student Asif Iqbal Tanha, claimed that members of his family have been trying to meet him by video conference, but their requests have not been approved.
Mr. Tanha also alleged that he has been repeatedly called a “terrorist” in prison.
Tanha’s lawyer, lawyer Sowjhanya Shankaran, previously said that when several of the defendants said they had been given basic things in prison, the court had requested a report from the prison authorities, but the report has not yet arrived.
The judge had said on November 3 that he would go to physically inspect the situation if things did not improve. But since all the complaints were dealt with by the prison authorities, the judge did not attend a physical inspection.
Co-defendant Umar Khalid told the court that, even after a month, he had not been provided with an electronic copy of the charge sheet.
The judge asked his lawyer to submit a request to the authorities of Tihar prison, where Mr. Khalid is held, to allow access to the electronic copy.
The court has presented the matter for a new hearing on January 5.
Community violence had erupted in northeast Delhi on February 24 after clashes between supporters of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and its protesters spiraled out of control, leaving at least 53 people dead and around 200 injured.
.
