Suhas Palshikar

A crisis of political courage


Suhas Palshikar

US Judge dismisses Indian-origin law student's lawsuit against Preet Bharara

Ads by Google
Preet Bharara

A US court here has dismissed a lawsuit filed by an Indian-origin law student against Manhattan's top federal prosecutor Preet Bharara and the Justice Department for unlawfully questioning her and seizing a phone during Rajat Gupta's insider trading trial.

Benula Bensam, 24, had filed a lawsuit against Bharara, federal prosecutors Reed Brodsky, Richard Tarlowe and the US Marshals Service in US District Court in July.

US District Judge Andrew Carter, however, dismissed the claims Bensam had filed against Bharara, Brodsky, Tarlow, Department of Justice and the US Marshals Service "for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted."

The law student had got into trouble during the Gupta trial in June after she sent three letters to presiding Judge Jed Rakoff on the case.

During one of the court proceedings in the trial, Bensam was escorted out of the courtroom by US Marshals and questioned over the letters she had sent to the judge.

She said in the lawsuit that the Marshals questioned her at length and refused to return her cell phone saying she could get it back only after she had answered all their questions.

The Marshals also attempted to take her picture with a mobile phone. Bensam also alleged that her phone had been tampered with by the court security.

In the lawsuit Bensam had alleged she was subject to "unreasonable search and seizure for unlawful stop, detention, interrogation, seizure of property, search of property, search of communications and demand for identification."

She is representing herself.

Carter said Bensam's only allegations against Brodsky and Tarlow are that they "knew of the letters [she] had written to Judge Rakoff" and "may have instigated the involvement of the US Marshals."

Similarly, Bensam's allegations that Bharara "may have instigated the involvement of the US Marshals," and "has advocated the use of intrusive surveillance" fail to state a claim that he failed to do anything that violated Bensam's rights, the judge ruled.

... contd.

Ads by Google
Please read our terms of use before posting comments
TERMS OF USE: The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
comments powered by Disqus