By LE Desk

New Delhi, June 9, 2021: A Delhi court has rejected an application seeking special supplementary diet for jailed Olympic medalist Sushil Kumar, who is under investigation for the murder of a 23-year-old wrestler.

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Satvir Singh Lamba rejected the application stating that all the basic needs and necessities of the accused/applicant are being taken care of as per the provisions of Delhi Prisons Rule, 2018, The Indian Express reported.

“The alleged special foods and supplements appears to be only the desires and wishes of the accused/applicant and are not in any manner the essential need or necessity for the accused/applicant. Hence, the prayer of the accused/applicant in the present application is not maintainable,” the order read.

Sushil’s lawyers sought the court’s permission to allow special foods and supplements to the accused, which contain protein, Omega-3 capsules, jointment capsules, Pre-workout C4, Hyde, Multivitamin GNC, Exercises Bands as he wanted to continue his career in wrestling.

The court said that with this application Sushil “reveals his wish to pursue his future carrier in wrestling”, however, he has “neither disclosed the details of any upcoming competition for which he has been qualified to participate nor has mentioned the name of any competition in which he is participating in nearby future.”

The jail superintendent had stated that all the under trial prisoners including, Sushil, have been provided food as per the provisions of Delhi Prisons Rules. It was also submitted that the accused was provided a balanced and healthy diet.

“It is well-settled law that all the persons, whether natural or juristic are equal in the eyes of law irrespective of their caste, religion, sex, class, etc. Right to equality is a basic feature of Indian Constitution. It implies the rule of law. It also implies absence of any special privilege in any person due to his rank, status, whether rich or poor, etc. The law should be equal and should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike,” the court said.

0 CommentsClose Comments

Leave a comment