Telangana High Court takes serious note of police high-handedness at Assembly

The Telangana High Court directed police not to prevent BRS legislators from entering the Assembly and asked the DGP to identify officials responsible for alleged excesses. Justice T. Madhavi Devi termed the alleged treatment of women legislators unacceptable and ordered stringent action

By Legal Correspondent

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Monday took serious note of the alleged high-handedness of the Telangana Police in stopping legislators at the Assembly entrance and allegedly manhandling women and men MLAs. While it was alleged that a woman legislator’s saree was pulled, Justice T. Madhavi Devi observed that photographs clearly showed another legislator’s throat being pressed and remarked that treating any woman in such a manner was unacceptable.

---

The judge accordingly directed the police not to prevent members of the Bharat Rashtra Samithi Legislature Party from entering the Telangana Legislative Assembly. The Court made it clear that any violation of the Rules governing the conduct of members within the House was a matter for the Speaker to deal with and not for the police.

The Court also directed the Director General of Police to identify the police officials responsible for the alleged excesses against BRS legislators, particularly women legislators, and take stringent action against them. The DGP was further directed to submit a report before the Court by the next date of hearing.

The writ petition was filed by the BRS Legislature Party through a lunch motion, seeking urgent intervention on the ground that several of its MLAs had been prevented by the police in a high-handed manner from entering the Assembly premises earlier in the day.

The BRS party submitted that the Speaker had convened the Assembly session for 15 days and that its legislators had arrived at the Assembly at around 10 a.m. to participate in the proceedings. It alleged that hundreds of police personnel had gathered at the Assembly premises, with women police personnel forming the first two rows and preventing the BRS MLAs from entering the premises.

It was also submitted that the legislators were merely wearing black T-shirts carrying slogans as part of a peaceful protest. As an Opposition party, the BRS legislators had the right to protest against what they considered misgovernance and also to offer advice and raise issues concerning the functioning of the government, contended the petitioner’s counsel.

It was further alleged that the police had unleashed violence against the BRS legislators. The counsel stated that a woman MLA who had earlier served as Home Minister was pressed by the neck and that another woman MLA’s saree was pulled. The counsel submitted that BRS Working President K.T. Rama Rao suffered injuries to his hand and head, while former minister and MLA Harish Rao was detained and arrested. Another MLA also suffered hand injuries during the incident.

The petitioner contended that the right to peaceful protest was a fundamental right and that the privileges and rights of legislators were also contemplated under Article 194 of the Constitution. Drawing a comparison with protests in Parliament, the counsel submitted that Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi and other members had participated in protests within the precincts of Parliament and that their rights had not been curtailed in such a manner.

The BRS party contended that no orders had been issued by either the Director General of Police or the Commissioner of Police authorising the police personnel deployed at the Assembly to prevent BRS legislators from entering the premises. Since the Assembly session had been convened for 15 days, the BRS party expressed apprehension that the same treatment could be repeated on the following days unless the Court intervened.

On behalf of the Home Department, Government Pleader Mahesh Raje submitted that the BRS legislators had worn black T-shirts containing objectionable slogans. He relied upon Rule 316 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Telangana Legislative Assembly, particularly Clause 13, which prohibits the display of badges or slogans. The submission, however, prompted a series of pointed questions from the Court regarding the authority of the police to prevent elected legislators from entering the Assembly.

The Court repeatedly questioned, “Has the police got the authority? Who is the authority to take action?” Referring to photographs placed before it, including one allegedly depicting a former Home Minister being restrained by police personnel pressing her neck, Justice Madhavi Devi questioned the manner in which the woman legislator was handled.

The Court questioned, “What is this conduct?” Referring to the photograph, the judge further questioned how a woman legislator could allegedly be held by her throat and observed that “treating any woman this way is unacceptable.” The Court noted that some of the women legislators were not even dressed in attire carrying slogans but had simply arrived wearing sarees.

“They are not in any sloganeering attire. They simply came in sarees. How can they be stopped? What powers did the police have?” the Court questioned.

At one stage, when the State counsel suggested that certain photographs or visuals could possibly have been generated or altered using Artificial Intelligence and stated that the women legislators were “allowed” to enter, the Court strongly objected to the use of the word “allowed”.

“If you are saying they were allowed by the police, what power does the police have to allow or disallow the members? It is their right to go and participate. That itself shows your police authority,” the Court observed.

The Court further emphasised that the responsibility of legislators was to discuss and raise issues on the floor of the Assembly and questioned the role of the police in preventing them from doing so. “The responsibility of the members is to discuss issues on the floor of the Assembly. How can the police stop them? Then why this ‘gallata’?” the Court asked. “This is not acceptable behaviour from the police. Police cannot become this hyper and behave this way,” Justice Madhavi Devi observed.

After hearing the rival submissions, the Court directed the respondent police authorities not to stop BRS legislators from entering the Assembly premises. The Court concurred with the petitioner’s contentions and clarified that if any member violated the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of the Legislative Assembly, it was for the Speaker to take appropriate action and not for the police to interfere with the entry of legislators.

The Director General of Police was also directed to identify the police officials responsible for the alleged misconduct and take stringent action against them. The DGP was directed to place a report before the Court regarding the action taken.

Observing that the incident could not simply be brushed aside, Justice Madhavi Devi remarked, “It cannot be ‘hogaya so hogaya’,” and observed that corrective measures also had to be taken.

The Court adjourned the matter by two weeks for further hearing.