Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking FIR Against Police Over Sonam Wangchuk's Removal

Court Rejects Plea for Police Action

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought the registration of an FIR against Delhi Police for what the petitioner described as the forceful removal of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk from Jantar Mantar.

A division bench of the court found no merit in the plea. Observing that the petition did not disclose any legally actionable grounds, the judges declined to issue any direction to the police. The court's order effectively closed the matter without any further hearing on the merits of the alleged forceful eviction.

Background of the Protest

The PIL was filed in the wake of Wangchuk's prolonged hunger strike at Jantar Mantar, where he had been demanding action on climate change and relief for students affected by legal cases related to protests. The activist had been sitting at the historic protest site for several weeks, drawing attention to his cause.

His removal from the location by authorities earlier this month had sparked a fresh round of political debate. Supporters of Wangchuk alleged that the police action was heavy-handed, while the administration maintained that it was a routine enforcement of public order regulations.

Wangchuk's Conditional Offer

In a parallel development, Wangchuk had indicated that he would end his hunger strike if the central government assured that no punitive action would be taken against student protesters associated with his cause. This offer was made in a letter addressed to the Prime Minister's Office.

The activist's condition was clear: stop what he termed the muzzling of dissent and initiate talks to resolve the issues raised by the protesters. His proposal was widely reported by multiple news outlets, including NDTV, The Hindu, and The Times of India, before the court's dismissal of the PIL.

Legal and Political Implications

The High Court's dismissal of the PIL is a setback for those seeking legal accountability for the manner in which Wangchuk was removed. Legal experts noted that the court's decision reaffirms the wide discretion available to law enforcement agencies in managing protest sites, as long as actions are within the bounds of law.

Political reactions have been divided. Opposition parties criticised the government's handling of the protest and the subsequent court verdict, while ruling party members defended the police action as necessary to maintain public order. The matter is expected to be raised in Parliament during the upcoming session.

The activist's health condition remains a concern, though his camp has not reported any medical emergency. Supporters continue to hold smaller demonstrations in solidarity, but the focus has now shifted to the government's response to Wangchuk's conditional offer.

What Happens Next

With the legal avenue now closed, all eyes are on whether the government will engage in talks with Wangchuk and his supporters. The ball is in the Centre's court to decide if it will offer the assurance the activist seeks to end his hunger strike, or if the standoff will continue indefinitely.