[Tripura Violence] Supreme Court asks petitioner-advocate to approach High Court, grants protection from coercive action

The Supreme Court on Friday granted protection from coercive action to Advocate Ehtasham Hashmi and asked him to assist the Tripura High Court in the suo motu case related to the October 2020 Tripura violence..The Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant ordered,"...we clarify that if the petitioner approaches physically before the High Court then no coercive step will be taken by Tripura police or no steps which precipitate his access to justice.".The Court was hearing Hashmi's plea alleging that the Tripura Police was harassing people who spoke out against the violence, instead of the miscreants who caused the same. Justice Chandrachud observed that the High Court should look into the allegations made by him."We will give you permission to intervene and assist the High Court and let the High Court look into the matter being raised by you here.".The Court also allowed the petitioner to join the suo motu proceedings before the High Court via virtual mode and asked the Court to consider if such an application seeking permission was made. .Appearing for Hashmi, advocate Prashant Bhushan informed the Bench that the matter pertains to a prayer seeking an independent probe into the violence against Muslims in Tripura, as mosques were burnt down during the riots.He stated that he is seeking an independent probe because of the partisan nature of the Tripura government and police, as they have long denied any communal violence and targeted people who reported on the same by registering cases against them under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act..He further informed the Court that as per the status report submitted by the State, they have admitted to some aspects. However, the Chief Minister of Tripura has still said that mosques were not burnt.The top court asked if the High Court is seized of the matter. To this Bhushan replied that the suo motu matter before the High Court is not regarding any inaction by the State government, and was on the aspect of compensation. .In view of the above, the Court granted the petitioners permission to intervene and assist the High Court in looking into the allegations made. The matter was thus disposed of..Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Tripura government, submitted that the petitioner should be asked to not post further inflammatory posts on social media. However, the Court did not pass any order to that effect. .Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, representing the State Police, requested the Bench to at least direct the petitioner to respond to notices by the police and co-operate in the investigation. However, to this, Bhushan replied, "I can show my lords what the police is doing.".The Bench made it clear that all contentions will remain open before the High Court..The Supreme Court in November 2021 had granted protection from arrest to two advocates and one journalist booked under the UAPA in connection with their social media posts and work related to the communal violence in Tripura.In December that year, it had stayed all criminal proceedings against the HW News Network and its journalists Samriddhi Sakunia and Swarnja Jha, who were booked by the Tripura Police for their reports on the violence.Earlier this year, the top court had restrained the Tripura Police from taking any further action against activist-journalist Samiullah Shabbir Khan for his tweets on the violence..[Read a live account of today's hearing]