IGP explains why Zamri handcuffed but not Arun

 Top cop Khalid Ismail says offences differ and measures are applied according to the law.

Independent preacher Zamri Vinoth (left) and activist Arun Dorasamy were charged in separate courts on Monday with making statements allegedly conducive to public mischief.

KUALA LUMPUR:

 Inspector-General of Police Khalid Ismail today explained why independent preacher Zamri Vinoth was brought to court in handcuffs while activist Arun Dorasamy was not.

Speaking at a press conference, he said that offences vary, with some allowing bail and others not.

“When we informed (the media) about the four arrests in Putrajaya that day, those were under Section 505 (of the Penal Code). But there is also another case related to the Sedition Act,” he said, without naming the individuals involved.

Khalid also insisted that the police were following standard legal procedures.

“I assure you that such actions are normal in our legal system, and we will continue to implement them as needed according to the requirements of the law itself,” he said.

Khalid was commenting on remarks by Zamri’s lawyer, who asked why his client was handcuffed while Arun was not.

The two men, who were involved in a dispute over a temple land issue, were charged in separate courts on Monday with making statements allegedly conducive to public mischief. The charges were framed under Section 505(b) of the Penal Code.

Khalid previously said that Zamri was also scheduled to face a sedition charge in Penang for allegedly insulting the Indian community.

Sedition and Section 505 offences are generally non-bailable, although courts may grant bail under Section 388 of the Criminal Procedure Code at their discretion. - FMT