sdpi: PFI, SDPI extremist groups engaged in serious acts of violence,
SDPI is a political party founded in 2009. It is the political wing of the Islamist organization PFI.
Responding to the court’s adverse remarks against it, SDPI said it would file an application to remove those observations.
“This is a very serious observation. So far no investigating agency has made such a statement against SDPI. On what basis did the court make such observation? The court’s observation should be reasonable. Here, it did not happen,”
Echoing the SDPI’s view, the PFI said the court’s observations against it were unreasonable.
In a Facebook post, state PFI leader CA Rauf lamented that the court had not heard them before making such adverse observations.
He said the PFI was planning to take legal action to remove those comments.
“The primary lesson of the administration of justice is to listen to the aggrieved party before making any remarks against the aggrieved party. No such incident has taken place in this case. It amounts to denial of natural justice,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Sangha family organizations welcomed the court’s observation against PFI and SDPI, claiming that there was evidence in the country to prove the “inhumane anti-national activities” of these organizations.
KP Shashikala, leader of Hindu Aikyabedi, said both PFI and SDPI should be banned. He said governments should also ensure that they do not engage in extremist activities in any form other than sanctions in the country.
Sanjit, 26, an RSS worker, was hacked to death on November 15 last year while taking his wife to his workplace. Police later arrested several people, including a PFI officer, in connection with the case
In its May 5 ruling, the High Court said the investigating officer denied involvement of state or national level leaders of the organization in the commission of the crime.
“The CBI cannot be asked to investigate just because some of the offenders are fugitives. Here, the investigating agency does not appear to have a special interest in the case or to protect the offenders. In other words, biased attitude. It cannot be presumed,” the court said.
Observing that the culprits involved in the crime have been identified and many of them have been arrested, the High Court said that if the investigation is handed over to the CBI, it will further delay the process.
“It is not in the public interest. It could also pave the way for defendants to be released on bail,” the court said in the order.
Leave a Reply