The Evening Wrap: Death penalty: 5-judge SC bench to frame guidelines on mitigating circumstances

The Supreme Court, in a judgment on September 19, 2022, referred to a Constitution Bench the question whether accused in death penalty cases should be given an opportunity to present mitigating circumstances in full and in detail before conviction by the trial court. In many death cases, an accused person is condemned to the gallows by the trial judge on the same day he or she is convicted of a crime. While the State is given an opportunity to present aggravating circumstances against the accused throughout the duration of a trial, the accused, on the other hand, is able to produce evidence showing mitigating circumstances in their favour, which may spare them the noose, only after their conviction, the court noted. Referring the case to a five-judge Bench, a three-judge Bench of Chief Justice U.U. Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Ajay Rastogi said the scales are tilted against the accused in a criminal trial which may lead to an irreversible consequence, namely, the death of the accused. “The accused in such cases are placed at a hopeless disadvantage with evidently the scales tilted against them,” Justice Bhat, who authored the verdict, said. In many cases the sentence hearing is a quick formality to be gone through once the order of conviction is pronounced. “The accused are scarcely accorded an opportunity to present mitigating circumstances,” Justice Bhat said. The three-judge Bench said a uniform approach as to when and how to afford an accused opportunity to present mitigating circumstances before their condemnation to death after the crime is declared “rarest of rare” should be decided authoritatively by a Constitution Bench. The reference to a larger Bench to examine an issue which has affected the fundamental rights of accused in death penalty cases may signal a move from the top court to veer criminal justice system away from death penalty itself. The judgment is significant as it identifies and seeks to resolve a debate on whether the death penalty, though considered a rarest of rare punishment, is being administered casually by the trial courts. During the hearing, Attorney General K.K. Venugopal had also opposed same-day sentencing, even suggesting that the entire proceedings should be adjourned after the stage of conviction in cases in which a person can be put to death as a form of punishment if found guilty. The defence team could use the time to collect mitigating factors. As of now, no effort is ever made to dig deeper into a convict’s childhood experiences, multigenerational history of physical and mental health issues, exposure to traumatic events and other familial, social and cultural factors crucial in order to undertake an individualised sentencing enquiry. Mitigatory circumstances quoted in favour of a convict while sentencing are often basic. These included the convict’s immediate family structure, education and work prior to arrest. During the hearing, Chief Justice Lalit had mused whether the mitigating circumstances ought to be brought to the attention of the trial court at the very stage of framing charges or even after the conclusion of the prosecution evidence. The court’s amicus curiae, senior advocate Siddharth Dave, had agreed that the trial judge should take the effort to call for every bit of material or evidence which could be seen as a mitigating circumstance in a death case. Advocate K. Parameswar, amicus curiae, had said the trial proceedings were conducted in such a way that the dice was always loaded against the accused. He had noted that the prosecution hammered in the aggravating circumstances throughout the trial against the accused while the mitigating factors were hardly heard. This kind of trial, followed by same-day sentencing, violated the right to equality. Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan lashes out at Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan accused Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s private secretary K. K. Ragesh, ex-MP, of preventing the police from arresting those who heckled him at the venue of the Indian History Congress (IHC) in Kannur University in 2019. Breaking with conventionalities, Khan held a nearly two-hour press conference at the Raj Bhavan to circulate a litany of charges against the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government and the “ideology of violence” that informed the ruling party. He said the government’s use of intimidation to coerce the governor to assent to the administration’s erroneous decisions had constrained him to reach out to the public via the media. During the protracted media interaction, Khan dropped ample hints that he would not sign into law the University Laws (Amendment) Act, 2022 and the Kerala Lok Ayukta (Amendment) Act, 2022. “I will not allow the government to infringe on the autonomy of universities. I will not let the political executive sit in judgement of its own cause. The legislation seeks to vest the government with the overriding appellate authority to circumvent any adverse and incriminating declaration by the Lok Ayukta, the constitutional anti-corruption watchdog. Such a law runs against the grain of natural justice and jurisprudence,” Khan said. Screening video footage and circulating government communications to back his charges, Khan said Vijayan had inducted Ragesh into his personal staff as a reward for restraining the police from arresting those who “conspired to harm” him at the (IHC) venue. The government also lobbied to appoint Ragesh’s wife as faculty in Kannur varsity’s Malayalam department. (The governor had stayed the appointment on nepotism charges.) Khan accused the CM’s political secretary of restraining the police from prosecuting the persons who tried to rush the dais. Khan said any attempt to overawe, intimidate or prevent the President or Governor from discharging his duties was a cognisable offence under section 124 of the IPC. It entails a punishment of seven years imprisonment and a fine. Khan said the statute of limitations did not apply to serious crimes. However, Raj Bhavan would not seek any probe against the “plotters”, he said. Khan sought a report of the incident from the Kannur vice-chancellor Gopinath Ravindran. Ravindran replied that “he was not a security expert and could not comment on such matters”, Khan said. Khan said Vijayan had gone back on his word that the government would not interfere in the Governor’s discretionary power to appoint vice-chancellors. He furnished a letter written by Vijayan. Khan said Vijayan requested him to extend the term of Kannur vice chancellor, Gopinathan Ravindran, beyond the retirement age. Khan said he would honour Vijayan’s request, but the selection procedure should proceed as per the norm. Khan asked the government to send a list of nominees, and the Chancellor would give weightage to Vijayan’s choice. However, the government scuttled the selection process and “pressurised” the governor to appoint Vijayan’s choice unilaterally. “I wrote to the CM that I was sick of the pressure brought upon me by the government in Kannur vice chancellor’s appointment. I did not wish to continue as Chancellor, and the CM could assume the post and do as he wanted. With hindsight, I repent that I assented to the appointment,“ Khan said. Khan said the ideology that drives the ruling front originated outside India. It sanctions the use of violence and intimidation to silence dissent. They (the ruling party) believe they have an inalienable right to break the law to achieve their political ends. A Minister lost his job because he rubbished the Constitution. An airline banned the ruling front convenor for unruly in-flight behaviour. Another ruling front MLA questioned India’s territorial integrity by adopting Pakistan’s language on Kashmir. “It is how they (ruling front workers) are indoctrinated in their training camps. Their ideology sanctions using force to liquidate class enemies, meaning persons who do not conform to the party’s political views. Can the CM deny that the ideology he adheres to favours strong-arm tactics?” Khan asked. The Governor said the political violence in Kannur and campus murders were apparent manifestations of the “foreign ideology”. Khan accused the government of employing the same tactics against Raj Bhavan. “Ruling front supporters attempted to harm me in Kannur. They prevented the police from prosecuting the lawbreakers. Later, a government secretary reminded the Governor there was no precedent for appointing persons active in politics as Raj Bhavan staff. The political executive has recurrently sought to undermine, malign and heap indignity on the governor’s office,” Khan said. Khan dismissed the CPI(M)’s highlighting of his meeting with RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat to impute political partisanship. “I have a long association with RSS since 1986. They supported my position in the Shah Banu case. So did late CPI(M) leader E. M. S. Namboodiripad. Then, the party changed tack and backed the personal law code. The RSS is not a proscribed organisation in India. Prime Minister Jawarhal Lal Nehru had invited the RSS to participate in the Republic Day parade”, he said. CPI(M) State secretariat member and former Law Minister A. K. Balan accused Khan of breaking his oath of office. Balan said Khan had denigrated the Governor’s office by using Raj Bhavan as a pulpit for politicking against the government at the RSS’s behest. He said the party CPI(M) would legally and politically counter the Governor’s trespasses on democracy and federalism. The government should move the president and chief justice of the Kerala High Court against Khan’s attempt to undermine the government and personally vilify the Chief Minister and his cabinet. Religious practice not confined to a temple or dargah, say petitioners in hijab case The Supreme Court on Monday said the fundamental issue to be decided in the Karnataka hijab case is whether the State can impose limitations on the fundamental rights of students in classrooms. “Can there be any limitations to fundamental rights in classrooms? Please address that question,” Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, who is part of the Bench led by Justice Hemant Gupta, asked senior advocate Dushyant Dave. “My fundamental right can be exercised anywhere… Whether I am in my bedroom, my classroom or whether I am before Your Lordships,” replied Dave, appearing for student-petitioners who have been proscribed from wearing hijab to their classrooms in Karnataka. Justice Gupta at one point observed that people covered their heads when they went to places of respect. To this, Dave answered that “a classroom is the most respected of all places”. He agreed there was a tradition in India to mark respect by covering the head. “Look at our Prime Minister… when he addresses from the Red Fort, he wears a turban representing the colours of all the States,” Dave said. The court asked what Dave would define as “religious practice”. The students have argued that the hijab was synonymous with their religious identity and belief. The court wondered whether religious practices would only mean those ostensibly associated with religion. The Bench said Muslim women going to the dargah or Parsis visiting the fire temple were practices of their respective religions. “But does ‘religious practice’ include dress?” Justice Gupta asked. The Bench said wearing a particular dress, like a white or an orange-coloured dhoti while conducting puja, may be linked to religion. But was wearing a particular dress outside religious places within the ambit of ‘religious practice’? “Religious practice is not confined to a temple or a dargah, etc. It is part of one’s religious conscience… One cannot quarrel with a Muslim woman’s faith or belief to wear hijab,” Dave responded. He quoted the Constituent Assembly debates to note that the only religion that matters before the court is the Constitution. Dave described India as a “beautiful democracy” where the majority was obliged not to discriminate against the minorities. He said the secular state in the Indian Constitution meant a state that does not discriminate on religion, a state that does not patronise nor prefer one religion over the other. “There are more than 10,000 suicide bombings in the Islamic countries and only one happened in India -- Pulwama. This shows that the minorities still place their trust in the majority,” he said. Three accused sent to 7-day police remand; SIT to probe leak of objectionable video allegedly made by Chandigarh University student A court on Monday sent the three accused arrested in the Chandigarh University video case to police remand for a week. Police produced the three accused in the Kharar court in Punjab’s Mohali and sought a ten-day remand. Punjab Director General of Police (DGP) Punjab Gaurav Yadav on Monday constituted a three-member all-woman Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe allegations levelled by Chandigarh University students that objectionable videos of girl students were recorded by another student. Terming the incident unfortunate, Yadav said the police had so far arrested three people, including the accused student and two others from Himachal Pradesh, after seizing certain electronic devices from their possession. “The SIT will go to the bottom of this matter and whoever is found involved in this case will not be spared,” he said. Yadav appealed to students, parents, and the community at large to maintain calm, and assured that the privacy and dignity of all individuals would be protected. He also urged people to rely only on authentic channels of information and not be swayed away by unverified rumours spread on social media platforms. On Saturday night, protests broke out on the university campus, which is situated in SAS Nagar in Punjab’s Mohali district. Several students alleged that the videos recorded by the accused girl student had been leaked. Vivek Sheel Soni, Senior Superintendent of Police, SAS Nagar, said that preliminary investigation showed the accused girl had made only one video, and she had not recorded anyone else. Indian mission condemns violence, temple attack in U.K. India on Monday strongly condemned violence against the Indian community and vandalisation of Hindu premises in the eastern England city of Leicester as it sought immediate action against those involved in these attacks. In a statement, the High Commission of India in London said it had “strongly” taken up the issue and called for protection for those affected from the U.K. authorities following reports of clashes over the weekend in the city, described as “serious disorder” by the local police. There have been reports of clashes between Hindu and Muslim groups in the city since fans clashed following an India-Pakistan Asia Cup cricket match at the end of last month. “We strongly condemn the violence perpetrated against the Indian community in Leicester and vandalisation of premises and symbols of Hindu religion,” the High Commission statement read. “We have strongly taken up this matter with the UK authorities and have sought immediate action against those involved in these attacks. We call on the authorities to provide protection to the affected people,” the statement said. Leicestershire Police said its operation in the east Leicester area affected by the disorder continues to prevent any further disorder, with 15 people arrested. “The impact this disorder is having on our local communities is not acceptable,” the police said in a statement. “We will not tolerate violence, disorder or intimidation in Leicester, and we continue to call for calm and dialogue. Our police operations and investigations continue with rigour and at scale,” it said. The force said a number of neighbouring police forces, including the mounted police unit, had been deployed to bring matters under control. Dispersal and stop and search powers were also used to restore calm. “Officers became aware of groups of young men gathering on Sunday afternoon in the North Evington area of the city. Officers spoke to them and took steps, including putting in place a temporary police cordon, to minimise harm and disturbance to communities,” the police said. It followed clashes on Saturday evening, when the police said it became aware of a video circulating showing a man pulling down a flag outside a religious building on Melton Road, Leicester, and said the incident would be investigated. Videos circulating on social media showed a temple flag being ripped out. Police had imposed similar dispersal orders earlier this month after a few days of unrest in the wake of the India versus Pakistan match in Dubai on August 28. The police and community leaders have been calling for calm over the past few weeks, amid reports of men coming in from other cities of the UK to stoke disorder in Leicester. “It’s mostly young men in their late teens and early 20s and I have heard suggestions people have come in (to the city) from outside looking for an opportunity to have a set to. It’s very worrying for people in the areas where this has happened,” said Sir Peter Soulsby, Leicester city mayor. In Brief: The Supreme Court Monday said it will appoint a neutral person to run the administration of the Indian Olympic Association and directed the secretary in the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports to interact with the International Olympic Committee on the issue. International Olympic Committee (IOC) on September 8 issued a final warning to IOA to “resolve its governance issues” and hold elections by December, failing which the world sports body will ban India. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. [logo] The Evening Wrap 19 SEPTEMBER 2022 [The Hindu logo] Welcome to the Evening Wrap newsletter, your guide to the day’s biggest stories with concise analysis from The Hindu. [[Arrow]Open in browser]( [[Mail icon]More newsletters]( Death penalty case: Supreme Court refers to five-judge bench on framing guidelines on mitigating circumstances The Supreme Court, in a judgment on September 19, 2022, referred to a [Constitution Bench the question whether accused in death penalty cases should be given an opportunity]( to present mitigating circumstances in full and in detail before conviction by the trial court. In many death cases, an accused person is condemned to the gallows by the trial judge on the same day he or she is convicted of a crime. While the State is given an opportunity to present aggravating circumstances against the accused throughout the duration of a trial, the accused, on the other hand, is able to produce evidence showing mitigating circumstances in their favour, which may spare them the noose, only after their conviction, the court noted. Referring the case to a five-judge Bench, a three-judge Bench of Chief Justice U.U. Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Ajay Rastogi said the scales are tilted against the accused in a criminal trial which may lead to an irreversible consequence, namely, the death of the accused. “The accused in such cases are placed at a hopeless disadvantage with evidently the scales tilted against them,” Justice Bhat, who authored the verdict, said. In many cases the sentence hearing is a quick formality to be gone through once the order of conviction is pronounced. “The accused are scarcely accorded an opportunity to present mitigating circumstances,” Justice Bhat said. The three-judge Bench said a uniform approach as to when and how to afford an accused opportunity to present mitigating circumstances before their condemnation to death after the crime is declared “rarest of rare” should be decided authoritatively by a Constitution Bench. The reference to a larger Bench to examine an issue which has affected the fundamental rights of accused in death penalty cases may signal a move from the top court to veer criminal justice system away from death penalty itself. The judgment is significant as it identifies and seeks to resolve a debate on whether the death penalty, though considered a rarest of rare punishment, is being administered casually by the trial courts. During the hearing, Attorney General K.K. Venugopal had also opposed same-day sentencing, even suggesting that the entire proceedings should be adjourned after the stage of conviction in cases in which a person can be put to death as a form of punishment if found guilty. The defence team could use the time to collect mitigating factors. As of now, no effort is ever made to dig deeper into a convict’s childhood experiences, multigenerational history of physical and mental health issues, exposure to traumatic events and other familial, social and cultural factors crucial in order to undertake an individualised sentencing enquiry. Mitigatory circumstances quoted in favour of a convict while sentencing are often basic. These included the convict’s immediate family structure, education and work prior to arrest. During the hearing, Chief Justice Lalit had mused whether the mitigating circumstances ought to be brought to the attention of the trial court at the very stage of framing charges or even after the conclusion of the prosecution evidence. The court’s amicus curiae, senior advocate Siddharth Dave, had agreed that the trial judge should take the effort to call for every bit of material or evidence which could be seen as a mitigating circumstance in a death case. Advocate K. Parameswar, amicus curiae, had said the trial proceedings were conducted in such a way that the dice was always loaded against the accused. He had noted that the prosecution hammered in the aggravating circumstances throughout the trial against the accused while the mitigating factors were hardly heard. This kind of trial, followed by same-day sentencing, violated the right to equality. Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan lashes out at Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan Kerala Governor [Arif Mohammad Khan accused Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s private secretary K. K. Ragesh]( ex-MP, of preventing the police from arresting those who heckled him at the venue of the Indian History Congress (IHC) in Kannur University in 2019. Breaking with conventionalities, Khan held a nearly two-hour press conference at the Raj Bhavan to circulate a litany of charges against the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government and the “ideology of violence” that informed the ruling party. He said the government’s use of intimidation to coerce the governor to assent to the administration’s erroneous decisions had constrained him to reach out to the public via the media. [Delegates and students displaying placards against Governor Arif Mohammad Khan at the inaugural session of the 80th Indian History Congress in Kannur. File] During the protracted media interaction, Khan dropped ample hints that he would not sign into law the University Laws (Amendment) Act, 2022 and the Kerala Lok Ayukta (Amendment) Act, 2022. “I will not allow the government to infringe on the autonomy of universities. I will not let the political executive sit in judgement of its own cause. The legislation seeks to vest the government with the overriding appellate authority to circumvent any adverse and incriminating declaration by the Lok Ayukta, the constitutional anti-corruption watchdog. Such a law runs against the grain of natural justice and jurisprudence,” Khan said. Screening video footage and circulating government communications to back his charges, Khan said Vijayan had inducted Ragesh into his personal staff as a reward for restraining the police from arresting those who “conspired to harm” him at the (IHC) venue. The government also lobbied to appoint Ragesh’s wife as faculty in Kannur varsity’s Malayalam department. (The governor had stayed the appointment on nepotism charges.) Khan accused the CM’s political secretary of restraining the police from prosecuting the persons who tried to rush the dais. Khan said any attempt to overawe, intimidate or prevent the President or Governor from discharging his duties was a cognisable offence under section 124 of the IPC. It entails a punishment of seven years imprisonment and a fine. Khan said the statute of limitations did not apply to serious crimes. However, Raj Bhavan would not seek any probe against the “plotters”, he said. Khan sought a report of the incident from the Kannur vice-chancellor Gopinath Ravindran. Ravindran replied that “he was not a security expert and could not comment on such matters”, Khan said. Khan said Vijayan had gone back on his word that the government would not interfere in the Governor’s discretionary power to appoint vice-chancellors. He furnished a letter written by Vijayan. Khan said Vijayan requested him to extend the term of Kannur vice chancellor, Gopinathan Ravindran, beyond the retirement age. Khan said he would honour Vijayan’s request, but the selection procedure should proceed as per the norm. Khan asked the government to send a list of nominees, and the Chancellor would give weightage to Vijayan’s choice. However, the government scuttled the selection process and “pressurised” the governor to appoint Vijayan’s choice unilaterally. “I wrote to the CM that I was sick of the pressure brought upon me by the government in Kannur vice chancellor’s appointment. I did not wish to continue as Chancellor, and the CM could assume the post and do as he wanted. With hindsight, I repent that I assented to the appointment,“ Khan said. Khan said the ideology that drives the ruling front originated outside India. It sanctions the use of violence and intimidation to silence dissent. They (the ruling party) believe they have an inalienable right to break the law to achieve their political ends. A Minister lost his job because he rubbished the Constitution. An airline banned the ruling front convenor for unruly in-flight behaviour. Another ruling front MLA questioned India’s territorial integrity by adopting Pakistan’s language on Kashmir. “It is how they (ruling front workers) are indoctrinated in their training camps. Their ideology sanctions using force to liquidate class enemies, meaning persons who do not conform to the party’s political views. Can the CM deny that the ideology he adheres to favours strong-arm tactics?” Khan asked. The Governor said the political violence in Kannur and campus murders were apparent manifestations of the “foreign ideology”. Khan accused the government of employing the same tactics against Raj Bhavan. “Ruling front supporters attempted to harm me in Kannur. They prevented the police from prosecuting the lawbreakers. Later, a government secretary reminded the Governor there was no precedent for appointing persons active in politics as Raj Bhavan staff. The political executive has recurrently sought to undermine, malign and heap indignity on the governor’s office,” Khan said. Khan dismissed the CPI(M)’s highlighting of his meeting with RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat to impute political partisanship. “I have a long association with RSS since 1986. They supported my position in the Shah Banu case. So did late CPI(M) leader E. M. S. Namboodiripad. Then, the party changed tack and backed the personal law code. The RSS is not a proscribed organisation in India. Prime Minister Jawarhal Lal Nehru had invited the RSS to participate in the Republic Day parade”, he said. CPI(M) State secretariat member and former Law Minister A. K. Balan accused Khan of breaking his oath of office. Balan said Khan had denigrated the Governor’s office by using Raj Bhavan as a pulpit for politicking against the government at the RSS’s behest. He said the party CPI(M) would legally and politically counter the Governor’s trespasses on democracy and federalism. The government should move the president and chief justice of the Kerala High Court against Khan’s attempt to undermine the government and personally vilify the Chief Minister and his cabinet. Religious practice not confined to a temple or dargah, say petitioners in hijab case The Supreme Court on Monday said the fundamental issue to be decided in the [Karnataka hijab case]( is whether the State can impose limitations on the fundamental rights of students in classrooms. “Can there be any limitations to fundamental rights in classrooms? Please address that question,” Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, who is part of the Bench led by Justice Hemant Gupta, asked senior advocate Dushyant Dave. “My fundamental right can be exercised anywhere… Whether I am in my bedroom, my classroom or whether I am before Your Lordships,” replied Dave, appearing for student-petitioners who have been proscribed from wearing hijab to their classrooms in Karnataka. Justice Gupta at one point observed that people covered their heads when they went to places of respect. To this, Dave answered that “a classroom is the most respected of all places”. He agreed there was a tradition in India to mark respect by covering the head. “Look at our Prime Minister… when he addresses from the Red Fort, he wears a turban representing the colours of all the States,” Dave said. The court asked what Dave would define as “religious practice”. The students have argued that the hijab was synonymous with their religious identity and belief. The court wondered whether religious practices would only mean those ostensibly associated with religion. The Bench said Muslim women going to the dargah or Parsis visiting the fire temple were practices of their respective religions. “But does ‘religious practice’ include dress?” Justice Gupta asked. The Bench said wearing a particular dress, like a white or an orange-coloured dhoti while conducting puja, may be linked to religion. But was wearing a particular dress outside religious places within the ambit of ‘religious practice’? “Religious practice is not confined to a temple or a dargah, etc. It is part of one’s religious conscience… One cannot quarrel with a Muslim woman’s faith or belief to wear hijab,” Dave responded. He quoted the Constituent Assembly debates to note that the only religion that matters before the court is the Constitution. Dave described India as a “beautiful democracy” where the majority was obliged not to discriminate against the minorities. He said the secular state in the Indian Constitution meant a state that does not discriminate on religion, a state that does not patronise nor prefer one religion over the other. “There are more than 10,000 suicide bombings in the Islamic countries and only one happened in India -- Pulwama. This shows that the minorities still place their trust in the majority,” he said. Three accused sent to 7-day police remand; SIT to probe leak of objectionable video allegedly made by Chandigarh University student A court on Monday sent the three accused arrested in the [Chandigarh University video case]( to police remand for a week. Police produced the three accused in the Kharar court in Punjab’s Mohali and sought a ten-day remand. Punjab Director General of Police (DGP) Punjab Gaurav Yadav on Monday constituted a three-member all-woman Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe allegations levelled by Chandigarh University students that objectionable videos of girl students were recorded by another student. Terming the incident unfortunate, Yadav said the police had so far arrested three people, including the accused student and two others from Himachal Pradesh, after seizing certain electronic devices from their possession. [Police personnel deployed outside Chandigarh University after objectionable videos of several women students were allegedly posted on social media, in Mohali, on September 18, 2022.] “The SIT will go to the bottom of this matter and whoever is found involved in this case will not be spared,” he said. Yadav appealed to students, parents, and the community at large to maintain calm, and assured that the privacy and dignity of all individuals would be protected. He also urged people to rely only on authentic channels of information and not be swayed away by unverified rumours spread on social media platforms. On Saturday night, protests broke out on the university campus, which is situated in SAS Nagar in Punjab’s Mohali district. Several students alleged that the videos recorded by the accused girl student had been leaked. Vivek Sheel Soni, Senior Superintendent of Police, SAS Nagar, said that preliminary investigation showed the accused girl had made only one video, and she had not recorded anyone else. Indian mission condemns violence, temple attack in U.K. India on Monday strongly condemned [violence against the Indian community and vandalisation of Hindu premises in the eastern England city of Leicester]( as it sought immediate action against those involved in these attacks. In a statement, the High Commission of India in London said it had “strongly” taken up the issue and called for protection for those affected from the U.K. authorities following reports of clashes over the weekend in the city, described as “serious disorder” by the local police. There have been reports of clashes between Hindu and Muslim groups in the city since fans clashed following an India-Pakistan Asia Cup cricket match at the end of last month. “We strongly condemn the violence perpetrated against the Indian community in Leicester and vandalisation of premises and symbols of Hindu religion,” the High Commission statement read. “We have strongly taken up this matter with the UK authorities and have sought immediate action against those involved in these attacks. We call on the authorities to provide protection to the affected people,” the statement said. Leicestershire Police said its operation in the east Leicester area affected by the disorder continues to prevent any further disorder, with 15 people arrested. “The impact this disorder is having on our local communities is not acceptable,” the police said in a statement. “We will not tolerate violence, disorder or intimidation in Leicester, and we continue to call for calm and dialogue. Our police operations and investigations continue with rigour and at scale,” it said. The force said a number of neighbouring police forces, including the mounted police unit, had been deployed to bring matters under control. Dispersal and stop and search powers were also used to restore calm. “Officers became aware of groups of young men gathering on Sunday afternoon in the North Evington area of the city. Officers spoke to them and took steps, including putting in place a temporary police cordon, to minimise harm and disturbance to communities,” the police said. It followed clashes on Saturday evening, when the police said it became aware of a video circulating showing a man pulling down a flag outside a religious building on Melton Road, Leicester, and said the incident would be investigated. Videos circulating on social media showed a temple flag being ripped out. Police had imposed similar dispersal orders earlier this month after a few days of unrest in the wake of the India versus Pakistan match in Dubai on August 28. The police and community leaders have been calling for calm over the past few weeks, amid reports of men coming in from other cities of the UK to stoke disorder in Leicester. “It’s mostly young men in their late teens and early 20s and I have heard suggestions people have come in (to the city) from outside looking for an opportunity to have a set to. It’s very worrying for people in the areas where this has happened,” said Sir Peter Soulsby, Leicester city mayor. In Brief: The Supreme Court Monday said it will appoint a neutral person to run [the administration of the Indian Olympic Association]( and directed the secretary in the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports to interact with the International Olympic Committee on the issue. International Olympic Committee (IOC) on September 8 issued a final warning to IOA to “resolve its governance issues” and hold elections by December, failing which the world sports body will ban India. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. Today’s Top Picks [[Two movies to be released in Kashmir theatres after 23 years] Two movies to be released in Kashmir theatres after 23 years]( [[Bail, a human right] Bail, a human right]( [[Watch | National List of Essential Medicines 2022: What’s in and out?] Watch | National List of Essential Medicines 2022: What’s in and out?]( [[Have to be realistic about losses; not easy to bring back animal from extinction: Cheetah expert] Have to be realistic about losses; not easy to bring back animal from extinction: Cheetah expert]( Copyright @ 2022, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](