The Punjab and Haryana High Court said that no immunity can be extended to protestors misusing Guru Granth Sahib as a “shield” while demanding the release of Sikh prisoners.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court took a firm stance against protestors utilizing the Guru Granth Sahib as a means of evading legal consequences during demonstrations demanding the release of Sikh prisoners.
The division bench, consisting of Acting Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Lapita Banerji, expressed dissatisfaction with the State of Punjab and the Union Territory of Chandigarh for their failure to provide relief to commuters affected by sit-in protests at the Mohali-Chandigarh border.
The court emphasized that the use of the Guru Granth Sahib by some protestors at the protest site does not justify the State of Punjab’s inaction against those exploiting religious sentiments for their cause.
“Only on account of the fact that some of the protestors have been hiding behind a shield of religious legitimacy by placing the Guru Granth Sahib would not as such give the State reason not to act against the persons concerned, who are misusing the religious sentiments,”
-the bench stated.
It highlighted the inconvenience caused to commuters and residents of the tri-city area (Chandigarh, Mohali, and Panchkula) due to a minority of individuals obstructing the road.
This matter was brought to the court’s attention through a petition filed last year by the Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) Arrive Safe Society, which argued that the sit-in was severely disrupting the movement of commuters between Punjab’s Mohali and Chandigarh.
In a notable move, the court had previously summoned the Director General of Police (DGP) of Punjab to ensure the removal of the protestors. Despite this, the bench observed that both the Punjab and Chandigarh administrations had been hesitant to address the issue decisively.
The court remarked,
“It is also apparent from the photographs which have been placed on record that there is no large gathering. In spite of the fact that it is well known that all the agitators from the rural background are busy in harvesting and it is the most opportune time to remove the blockage of the road, the State of Punjab and the Union Territory, Chandigarh, are dragging their feet for the reasons best known to them.”
With the proceedings deferred to April 18, the court expressed its hope that the concerned authorities would “wake up from their slumber” and heed the Supreme Court’s guidance against the occupation of public ways by protestors, as delineated in the cases of “State of Himachal Pradesh and another Vs. Umed Ram Sharma, 1986 (2) SCC 68” and “Amit Sahni Vs. Commissioner of Police and others, 2020 (10) SCC 439.”
The court’s directive serves as a reminder of the judiciary’s stance on maintaining the balance between the right to protest and the public’s right to unhindered access to roadways.
CASE TITLE:
Arrive Safe Society Vs. State of Punjab and others.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on BJP
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
