The Supreme Court on Monday refused to grant anticipatory bail to an activist accused of obstructing a public servant and interfering with a government road construction project, while expressing serious concern over the growing misuse of the Right to Information (RTI) activism.
The Bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Vijay Bishnoi dismissed the anticipatory bail plea filed by RTI activist Rakesh Kumar Behl, challenging an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which had earlier denied him pre-arrest protection.
The Apex Court orally remarked during the hearing that RTI activism had become a new business and questioned the petitioner’s role in monitoring public works projects. Noting that public infrastructure projects were executed and monitored through established governmental mechanisms, the Bench questioned the petitioner’s authority to oversee the execution of the road construction work.
The judges indicated that supervision of such projects fell within the domain of the authorities responsible for the implementation and monitoring of government schemes.
As per the First Information Report (FIR), the petitioner, along with a co-accused, allegedly obstructed the ongoing construction of a road and interfered with the execution of the project. It was alleged that they confronted the complainant, under whose supervision the work was being carried out, as well as labourers present at the site.
The prosecution further alleged that the petitioner assaulted the complainant, while the co-accused physically attacked him by kicking him. It was also alleged that caste-based derogatory remarks were made against labourers working at the site.
Following the incident, an FIR was registered invoking Sections 304(2), 132, 221, 121(1), 351(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, along with Sections 3(5) and 121(2) of the BNS and Section 3(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
While rejecting the plea for anticipatory bail, the Supreme Court took note of the allegations levelled against the petitioner and declined to interfere with the order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The High Court, while denying anticipatory bail, had observed that the allegations contained in the FIR disclosed specific and direct involvement of the petitioner in obstructing government work and interfering with the execution of a public project. Taking note of the nature of the accusations and the material placed on record, the High Court had refused to grant him the discretionary relief of pre-arrest bail.
Taking note of the allegations and the stage of the investigation, the Supreme Court declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner and dismissed the plea, allowing the investigation to proceed in accordance with law.
The post Supreme Court denies anticipatory bail to RTI activist accused of obstructing road construction work appeared first on India Legal.