The apex court bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna directed the authorities to keep track of the happenings in the meeting and record the event
Team Clarion
NEW DELHI – The Supreme Court has refused to entertain a plea filed by senior bureaucrats and activists seeking contempt action against the Ghaziabad district administration and the Uttar Pradesh State Police for allowing a dharam sansad of which advertisements sport communal remarks.
However, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna on Thursday directed the authorities to keep track of the happenings in the sansad and record the event.
The five-day dharam sansad which began on December 17 has been organised in Ghaziabad by Yati Narasinghanand – a controversial priest infamous for making communally sensitive remarks.
“Please keep track of what is happening, recordings of the event should be there. The mere fact that we are not entertaining this petition does not mean violations should occur,” the bench also comprising Justice PV Sanjay Kumar told Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, representing Uttar Pradesh.
Pointing out that it would not be possible for the Supreme Court to entertain such pleas directly, the court noted that it expects compliance by the authorities with its previous directions to curb hate speech.
“We are not inclined to entertain (the petition). We reiterate the earlier orders that district officers must take all precautionary measures to ensure compliance,” noted the bench.
The petitioners, a group of former civil servants and activists including retired IAS officer Aruna Roy and former Planning Commission member Syeda Hameed, argued that the advertisements and website for the dharam sansad openly incited hatred and violence against the Muslim community. They claimed that despite representations to the Ghaziabad administration and police, no action was taken to prevent the event, violating the Supreme Court’s earlier directions for proactive measures against hate speeches.
When the lawyer for the petitioners, Prashant Bhushan, pointed out the inaction of authorities and Narasinghanand’s history of hate speeches against the Muslim community, the court advised approaching the high court instead.
“We should not be the first court to be approached in such matters…if we entertain one, we will have to entertain all,” said CJI Khanna, adding that bail cancellation could be sought if there were violations by Narasinghanand, who is already on bail in multiple hate speech cases.
