Allahabad High Court junks PIL against observing Samvidhaan Hatya Divas to mark Emergency excesses

The Allahabad High Court recently dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition which challenged the Central government's notification to observe June 25 as 'Samvidhaan Hatya Divas' to pay tribute to those who suffered and fought against the National Emergency imposed in 1975 by the government of India..The petition by a former Indian Police Service (IPS) officer, Amitabh Thakur had taken objection to the terminology used in the July 13 notification and had sought a more appropriate term like 'Samvidhaan Raksha Diwas' to convey the intent of the notification.However, a Bench of Justice Sangeeta Chandra and Justice Shree Prakash Singh observed said that these are political decisions and the Court cannot enter into that realm and exercise its power of judicial review. "This Court, having heard the counsel for the petitioner at some length, is of the considered opinion that it is the lookout of the Government for declaration to be made with regard to the excesses caused by the proclamation of Emergency on 25.06.1975. The Court cannot enter into the political thicket and cannot question the political wisdom of the Government in issuing such a notification, as has been challenged in this writ petition," the order dated July 25 said..Thakur moved the Court arguing that the government's notification was improper and would send an adverse message to the public about the Constitution.It was his case that ordinary people of India are not very literate and they will not understand the import of the government's notification. Instead of using the words Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas, the government could have used more appropriate language and should have thought of a positive terminology. For example, they could have used the words "Samvidhaan Raksha Diwas" as the intent of the notification was only to remind the people of India of the excesses that were committed by the government of the day by the proclamation of Emergency, the petitioner argued.It was further submitted that the use of the words Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas was a reiteration of the violence that was done to the people's rights during the proclamation of Emergency. However, it could not be said that the Constitution itself was killed, the petitioner argued, adding that if the government felt that the Constitution was 'killed', it would not have been possible for a revival of democracy when the people of India threw out the government of the day in general elections held after the Emergency was lifted..The Central government raised a preliminary objection to the plea.The government contended that while the petitioner had identified himself as a social and political activist, he had failed to disclose that he was accused of instigating a rape victim's suicide outside the Supreme Court premises.To this, the petitioner's counsel replied that despite the addition of Rule 3A to Chapter 22 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952, there is no requirement to state on affidavit whether a petitioner is an accused in a criminal case..After hearing both sides, the Court refused to grant relief and disposed of the plea.Advocate Deepak Kumar and Nutan Thakur appeared for the petitioner.Deputy Solicitor General Surya Bhan Pandey and advocate Varun Pandey appeared for the Central government.The Delhi High Court too recently dismissed a PIL challenging the government's move to observe Samvidhaan Hatya Divas. Another petition raising the same issue is pending before the Allahabad High Court..[Read Order]