Hyderabad : The Telangana high court on Tuesday questioned the police over their alleged high-handedness towards women BRS legislators at the assembly premises on Monday, asking whether the incident reflected the force’s attitude towards women lawmakers and women in general.
Justice Madhavi Devi also took exception to the state’s use of the word “permitted”, asking under what authority the police could allow or deny legislators entry when elected members had a right to enter the House and discharge their duties. Hearing a vacate petition filed by the state against Monday’s orders, Justice T Madhavi Devi expressed concern over allegations that a woman MLA’s saree was pulled and another was allegedly held by the neck while police personnel prevented BRS legislators from entering the assembly premises. The judge also questioned the absence of women police personnel during the incident. “Is this the respect you show to women, particularly women legislators? They were allegedly manhandled despite neither wearing T-shirts displaying slogans nor carrying posters or placards, and were merely dressed in black sarees,” the judge observed. He submitted that the police had acted on instructions from the DGP, who had received directions from the speaker’s office to restrain legislators allegedly violating assembly guidelines. The judge, however, sought clarification on whether those guidelines had been issued before or after the alleged incident and reserved orders on the matter. She also asked when the speaker’s office had communicated its instructions to the DGP.
Questioning the registration of cases against the BRS legislators, the judge asked whether the assembly chief marshal had authorised the police to stop the MLAs and whether such communication had been placed before the court. On Monday, the court directed the Director General of Police (DGP) not to restrain BRS MLAs from entering the assembly and to identify and take action against police personnel allegedly involved in the incident. Advocate general A Sudarshan Reddy, arguing the vacate petition for the state, contended that the observations and directions of the court (on Monday) could impact the discharge of police duties.