Clarion India
NEW DELHI — The Supreme Court on Tuesday disposed of a pending Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which highlighted alleged instances of mob lynching and cow vigilantism and asked those aggrieved to pursue the remedies available in law and and added that the directions in the Tehseen Poonawalla vs. Union of India case were binding on all authorities across India.
A Bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and K.Vinod Chandran opined that sitting in the national Capital, it cannot monitor incidents in different areas of different states across the country.
“Sitting in Delhi, we cannot monitor incidents in different areas of the country and in our view such micromanagement would not be feasible,” said the Justice Gavai-led Bench, reports IANS.
The apex court said, “If there is non-compliance with Tehseen Poonawalla, aggrieved person has remedy in law. Sitting in Delhi, we can’t monitor incidents in different areas in different states of the country. Such micromanagement would not be feasible. If any other person is aggrieved, they can approach (concerned authority) in accordance with law.”
In its 2018 judgment in the Poonawalla case, the Supreme Court had directed designation of nodal officer in each district for taking measures to prevent incidents of mob violence and lynching.
“The Director General of Police/the Secretary, Home Department of the concerned states shall take regular review meetings (at least once a quarter) with all the Nodal Officers and State Police Intelligence heads,” it had ordered.
Further, the apex court refused to examine the validity of cow protection laws introduced in several states, suggesting the litigants to approach the jurisdictional High Court.
“It will be appropriate that persons who are aggrieved approach jurisdictional High Courts to challenge the vires of the legislations/notifications,” the SC said.
In context of the petitioner’s prayer for provision of “minimum uniform amount” as compensation for injuries to victims of mob lynching, it was opined that the amount of adequate compensation would differ on a case-to-case basis. Supposing grant of uniform compensation to person suffering from simple injury vis-a-vis person suffering grievous injury, the Court said that no uniform direction regarding compensation could be issued to the authorities, reports Live Law.
“Doing so would be taking away discretion available to the Courts or the authorities in determination of compensation…A direction to pay uniform compensation would be unjust…We find that petition seeking such omnibus reliefs would neither be in interest of victims”, the Court opined.
The PIL, filed by National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW), raised concern regarding the alleged increase in cases of mob violence – particularly by cow vigilantes. It sought a direction from the Court for authorities to take action in terms of the decision in Tehseen Poonawalla, where comprehensive guidelines were issued to the Union and State governments regarding prevention of lynching and mob violence.
Pending since 2023, the case witnessed the top Court issue warning last year to 5 states (Assam, Chhattisgarh, Telangana, Maharashtra and Bihar) over failure to file counter-affidavits in response to the PIL. On this occasion, it was directed that the affidavits of the 5 states be filed by their respective Chief Secretaries, failing which, the Chief Secretaries were to themselves remain present and show cause as to why action not be taken against them.
Through the PIL, NFIW urged the top court to issue a mandamus to authorities to take immediate action “in terms of the findings and directions in Tehseen Poonawalla” to address the growing problem. In this connection, the petition referred to two incidents of Muslims being lynched by a mob over a suspicion of smuggling beef in Bihar’s Saran and Nashik in Maharashtra; an alleged assault by Bajrang Dal on a Muslim daily wage earner for transporting two cows; a violent attack, illegal detention, and humiliation of two Muslim men by an angry mob in Orissa’s capital, Bhubaneshwar; and an attack on a bus carrying several Hajj pilgrims by a violent mob in Kota, Rajasthan, according to media reports.
The petitioner further submitted that the incidents of mob lynching and cow vigilantism should be seen as a result of false propaganda against minorities spread by means of public events as well as on social media channels, news channels, and films.
Besides praying for a writ of mandamus seeking the enforcement of the Tehseen Poonawalla guidelines, NFIW also sought immediate relief for the lynching victims by asking for a portion of the total amount of compensation to be granted to the victims or their families immediately after the incident as ‘interim compensation’.
In an earlier hearing, the top court had pulled up the state governments of Assam, Chhattisgarh, Telangana, Maharashtra, and Bihar for not filing their counter-affidavits.
“We clarify that in the event counter affidavits are not filed by the above-mentioned states, the Chief Secretaries of the said states shall remain personally present in the court on the next date of hearing to show cause as to why an action should not be taken against them for non-compliance of the orders of the court,” it had said in an order passed on November 5, 2024.
Earlier in April last year, the apex court had granted six weeks to various state governments to file their reply detailing the action taken in cases of lynchings and mob violence.
In July 2023, the Supreme Court issued notice to the Centre and the Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Odisha, and Maharashtra governments. Later, all state governments were added as parties in the PIL on an application moved by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind. The plea prayed for a minimum uniform compensation to be determined by the court that should be granted to the victims or their families in addition to the amount determined by the authorities. — With inputs from IANS, Live Law
