The Supreme Court Today (April 16th) asked various state governments to apprise it in six weeks on the action taken in incidents of mob lynching and cow vigilantism.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court issued a directive today, calling upon various state governments to provide an update within six weeks on the measures taken to address incidents of mob lynching and cow vigilantism.
A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai, Aravind Kumar, and Sandeep Mehta scheduled a hearing after six weeks in response to a plea filed by a women’s organization. The plea sought directions to states to promptly address incidents of lynching and mob violence against Muslims by cow vigilantes, aligning with a 2018 verdict of the apex court.
“We find that most of the states have not filed their reply affidavits to the writ petition giving instances of mob lynching. It was expected of the states to at least respond to what action has been taken in such cases. We grant six weeks’ time to the states who have not filed their replies and also give details of steps taken by them in such cases,”
-the bench ordered.
The plea, filed by the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW), an organization associated with the Communist Party of India, prompted notices to the Centre and the Directors General of Police (DGPs) of Maharashtra, Orissa, Rajasthan, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Haryana last year, seeking their responses.
During the hearing, advocate Nizam Pasha, representing the petitioner organization, highlighted an incident in Madhya Pradesh where an alleged mob lynching occurred, yet the FIR was registered against the victims for cow slaughter. Pasha raised concerns, stating,
“If the state is to deny the incident of mob lynching, then how can the 2018 verdict in the Tehseen Poonawalla case be followed.”
In the Tehseen Poonawalla case, the Supreme Court issued a series of directives to states to curb incidents of cow vigilantism and mob lynching.
The bench questioned the counsel representing the Madhya Pradesh government regarding the registration of an FIR for cow slaughter without chemical analysis of the meat and the absence of an FIR against those involved in the altercation.
“Are you trying to save someone? How can you register an FIR for cow slaughter without even chemical analysis,”
-the bench remarked to the counsel for Madhya Pradesh, urging him to provide details of the incident.
Pasha further pointed out a similar occurrence in Haryana, where a case for transporting beef was registered instead of one for mob lynching.
“States are denying that there were any incidents of mob lynching, and FIRs are being registered for cow slaughter against the victims. Only two states, Madhya Pradesh and Haryana, have filed their affidavit on incidents pointed out in the writ petition and interlocutory applications, but other states have not filed any affidavit,”
-he submitted.
Justice Kumar instructed Pasha that incidents mentioned in the petitions should not be selectively chosen from particular states; instead, all incidents should be mentioned. Senior advocate Archana Pathak Dave, representing one of the states, noted that the writ petition specifically alleges mob lynching of Muslim men without mentioning incidents involving people of other religions.
“The relief sought cannot be religion-specific,”
-she emphasized.
Pasha countered, stating that this is the reality of society, and incidents against particular communities can be brought before the court. The bench urged Dave to exercise restraint in her submissions, stating,
“Let’s not go into the incidents on the basis of religion. We should focus on the larger cause.”
The Supreme Court postponed the matter for hearing after the summer vacation and ordered that states should file their replies on the steps taken to combat mob lynching.
Last year on July 28, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a plea seeking urgent intervention due to the “alarming” rise in cases of lynching and mob violence targeting Muslims, despite clear guidelines issued in 2018 regarding cow vigilantism.
“In view of the alarming rise in cases of lynching and mob violence against the Muslim community, the petitioner is seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus to the concerned State authorities to take immediate action in terms of the findings and directions of this court in Tehseen Poonawalla so as to effectively contain and deal with the same,”
-the plea stated.
In its 2018 verdict, the Supreme Court emphasized that states have the primary obligation to prevent vigilantism, including cow vigilantism, and issued guidelines for authorities to address such incidents.
The PIL cited several instances of mob violence, including the recent killing of a 55-year-old truck driver named Jaharuddin in Bihar’s Saran district on suspicion of carrying beef. It highlighted that this incident occurred shortly after two similar incidents in Maharashtra’s Nashik.
The PIL requested direction to the Centre to provide a minimum uniform amount to victims of such violence, in addition to compensation determined by the respective states, considering factors like bodily and psychological injury, loss of earning, legal and medical expenses, and loss of employment opportunities.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Mob Lynching & Cow Vigilantism
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES