Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
The Supreme Court denied anticipatory bail to two men accused of obstructing road construction, assaulting workers, and making caste-based remarks. The Court criticised alleged misuse of RTI activism, observing that some individuals were interfering with public authorities and official duties.
The Supreme Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to two men accused of obstructing a government road construction project, assaulting workers and using caste-based abusive remarks, while making strong observations on what it described as the misuse of RTI applications by certain individuals.
A Bench comprising Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Vijay Bishnoi observed that some people claiming to be RTI activists were interfering with the functioning of public authorities and preventing officials from carrying out their responsibilities.
During the hearing, the Court questioned the authority of individuals who monitor public projects without any official role and remarked:
“You obstructed public servants from performing their duties. RTI activists. It’s become a new business. You don’t allow people to work…Who are you to monitor all these road progress and all? Are you an engineer there or superior authority? Are you an authorised representative of public? So called RTI activist,”
ALSO READ: Advocates Cannot Use RTI to Seek Case Details for Clients’ Cases: CIC
The Bench made the remarks while hearing a petition filed by the accused challenging the rejection of their anticipatory bail application.
During the hearing, counsel appearing for the accused argued that the applicants were merely attempting to highlight alleged corruption and irregularities in a road construction project for which approximately Rs 57 crore had been sanctioned by the Central government. The counsel submitted that the accused had raised concerns regarding the quality of work and alleged misuse of public funds.
However, the Supreme Court rejected the argument and said that monitoring and execution of government-funded projects was the responsibility of the competent authorities and not private individuals.
The Bench observed:
“Central government has issued funds. Central government will take care of the construction. You are nobody,”
Following these observations, the Court dismissed the anticipatory bail plea.
Background of the Case
The matter originated from an FIR registered at Batala City Police Station on February 20 this year. According to the prosecution’s version, the accused allegedly disrupted an ongoing road construction project, threatened the complainant and labourers working at the site, and used caste-based derogatory remarks against workers belonging to Scheduled Castes.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Defers RTI Petitions Targeting Political Party Transparency
The complaint alleged that the accused persons created obstruction during the execution of public work and intimidated those present at the construction site.
The FIR further alleged that one of the accused attacked the complainant using a datar (a sharp-edged agricultural weapon), while the other allegedly kicked him repeatedly, resulting in several injuries. The police also claimed that official documents connected with the project were taken away during the incident.
The accused persons denied the allegations and claimed that they had been wrongly implicated because they had raised objections regarding alleged corruption in the road construction project.
According to their version, inferior-quality materials were being used in the work and their complaints against contractors and officials led to the registration of a false criminal case against them.
They argued that their actions were aimed at ensuring transparency in the use of public money and that the criminal proceedings were initiated only to silence their objections.
Punjab and Haryana High Court Had Earlier Denied Relief: Before approaching the Supreme Court, the accused had moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking anticipatory bail. The High Court rejected their plea in May after examining the allegations and material placed before it.
ALSO READ: Judicial Officers’ Complaints Are Private: Chhattisgarh High Court Bars RTI Disclosure
The High Court noted that the FIR contained specific allegations regarding the accused’s involvement in obstructing government work, assaulting the complainant and labourers, and making caste-based remarks.
The Court also considered medical evidence showing that the complainant had suffered seven injuries, including one injury classified as grievous.
The High Court observed that the allegations could not be ignored merely because the accused claimed to be exposing corruption. It held that the accusations required proper investigation and that custodial interrogation of the accused was necessary.
The Court further noted that claims of corruption in the project could not, at that stage, justify protection from arrest when serious allegations of violence and obstruction of public duty were pending.
Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Bail
Challenging the High Court’s decision, the accused approached the Supreme Court. After hearing the parties, the Apex Court refused to interfere with the High Court order and dismissed the anticipatory bail plea.
The ruling highlights the Court’s concern over individuals interfering in public projects without lawful authority while also distinguishing between genuine public interest action and alleged obstruction of government functions.
The criminal proceedings against the accused will continue before the appropriate court.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE