The Supreme Court Today (Dec 19) refused to entertain a plea alleging failure of Uttar Pradesh Police to act against the Dharam Sansad slated to be organized by Yati Narasinghanand and others in Uttar Pradesh’s Ghaziabad this week. The contempt of court petition filed by a group of civil society members including former bureaucrats was heard by a Bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India on Thursday chose not to entertain a petition accusing Uttar Pradesh Police of inaction against the Dharam Sansad event planned by Yati Narasinghanand and others in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, this week.
The contempt petition, filed by a group of civil society members including retired bureaucrats, was brought before a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar.
The petitioners claimed that the event could potentially violate prior Supreme Court orders regarding hate speech.
Supreme Court Refers Petitioners to High Court
While addressing the plea, the apex court advised the petitioners to approach the High Court for appropriate remedies.
“There are other matters which are equally serious. We will be flooded if we entertain this. You have to approach the High Court. We cannot entertain,”
-the Bench stated.
Supreme Court Warns Uttar Pradesh Authorities
Although the Supreme Court refused to hear the plea, it issued a warning to the Uttar Pradesh government, emphasizing the need to monitor the Dharam Sansad event closely.
The Court instructed state authorities to ensure proper video recording of the event to document proceedings.
“Additional Solicitor General (KM) Nataraj, please tell authorities to keep a track and video recording has to be kept. Just because we are not entertaining this does not mean we are avoiding the issue,”
-the Court remarked.
Petitioners Raise Concern Over Hate Speech
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioners, highlighted a critical issue regarding Yati Narasinghanand’s past behavior.
Bhushan reminded the Court that Narasinghanand was granted bail on the condition that he would refrain from engaging in hate speech.
“This is a serious issue. Also the bail condition for this gentleman,”
-Bhushan argued.
In response, the Supreme Court reiterated that the petitioners should seek bail cancellation by moving to the High Court.
“How can you approach Supreme Court then? You can move High Court for cancellation of bail. We leave it open for the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies. We also reiterated earlier order to maintain law and order and all officers should ensure compliance of law,”
-the Court clarified.
Allegations of Hate Speech and Communal Tensions
The petitioners, which include respected former bureaucrats and activists such as Aruna Roy, Ashok Kumar Sharma, Deb Mukarji, Navrekha Sharma, Syeda Hameed, and Vijayan MJ, accused Yati Narasinghanand and others of inciting communal hatred against Muslims.
“The website and the advertisements for this Sansad include several communal statements against the followers of Islam, inciting violence against Muslims,”
-the plea stated.
The petitioners also alleged that the Uttar Pradesh Police had failed to take any preventive action, despite earlier directions issued by the Supreme Court in 2022.
These directions had called for immediate and unbiased action in cases involving hate speech, regardless of the offender’s religion.
Supreme Court’s Previous Guidelines
In 2022, the Supreme Court had issued suo motu directives for strict action against hate speech incidents, instructing authorities to ensure compliance without considering the religious identity of the offenders.
Petitioners argue that these guidelines have been violated repeatedly by individuals like Narasinghanand, who has been accused of delivering provocative and hate-filled speeches targeting Muslims.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Yati Narsinghanand’s Dharam Sansad
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
