The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a petition seeking action against potential hate speech at the upcoming Mahapanchayat in Uttarakhand..A vacation bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah asked the petitioner to approach the High Court first, and said that the petitioner should repose trust in High Court."Why this distrust of the High Court? They also have jurisdiction. You should have some trust. Why this short circuiting, we are not on merits or cause. Why do you distrust the administration?"The petitioner then withdrew the plea which was allowed with liberty to move the High Court."Counsel is given liberty to move the High Court or any authority for relief, plea is dismissed as withdrawn," the Court ordered..Advocate Shahrukh Alam mentioned the case this morning arguing that this was an urgent matter, while citing a continuing mandamus by the court against hate speech."They have called for a mahapanchayat, saying a community has to leave by 15th," she explained. .The Mahapanchayat is set to take place tomorrow in Purola, amid continued communal tension. According to the petitioner, the Association for Protection of Civil Rights, if the hate speech event is allowed to continue, it would lead to a boil in communal tensions."The District authorities are in breach of this Hon’ble Court’s mandate in not instituting a criminal case and immediately prosecuting the habitual offender ... it was incumbent upon State authorities to curb such speech/ mobilization. Non-action results in constitutional harm to the targeted group, since it violates their rights under Article 14, 19 and 21. Lack of decisive criminal action on the letter, and informal mediations that force inequitable compromises add to the constitutional harm ... Permitting a rally that promotes communal frenzy can severely damage communal harmony and social cohesion", the petition filed through advocate Talha Abdul Rahman stated. .The petitioners sought the Court's intervention to uphold fraternity and communal harmony."The instant petition is being filed to prevent communal violence and frenzy being created in Uttarakhand, affecting the fraternity. The instant writ petition seeks directions against Respondents to perform their statutory duty to prevent communally charged atmosphere, communalization, and communal violence by taking necessary preventive and curative steps and to ensure that there is no forced migration of citizens from one area of the country to another area in the name of protecting the “devbhumi”.Such events can deepen divisions among communities, increase polarisation, and lead to hate crimes, it was stressed. "Allowing a rally that incites communal frenzy may contribute to an atmosphere that facilitates hate crimes and communal violence. The authorities have a responsibility to take preventive measures to curb such activities to safeguard the rights and safety of individuals."Accordingly, the plea had sought directions that the respondents to take strict against those concerned, apart from legal measures like ensuring protection to those likely to be affected and prevention of the hate speech event. Further, the petitioner sought the registration of a criminal complaint and an impartial probe into the matter.The Supreme Court had, in October 2022, ordered the Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand Police to take suo motu action in cases of hate speech without looking at the religion of the offenders..The top court had, in April this year, extended the scope of that order to all states and union territories across the country. .Apart from advocates Alam and Rahman, the instant plea was drawn by advocates Archit Krishna, Priya Vats Mohammad Shaz Khan, Tamanna Pankaj, and Adnan Yousuf.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a petition seeking action against potential hate speech at the upcoming Mahapanchayat in Uttarakhand..A vacation bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah asked the petitioner to approach the High Court first, and said that the petitioner should repose trust in High Court."Why this distrust of the High Court? They also have jurisdiction. You should have some trust. Why this short circuiting, we are not on merits or cause. Why do you distrust the administration?"The petitioner then withdrew the plea which was allowed with liberty to move the High Court."Counsel is given liberty to move the High Court or any authority for relief, plea is dismissed as withdrawn," the Court ordered..Advocate Shahrukh Alam mentioned the case this morning arguing that this was an urgent matter, while citing a continuing mandamus by the court against hate speech."They have called for a mahapanchayat, saying a community has to leave by 15th," she explained. .The Mahapanchayat is set to take place tomorrow in Purola, amid continued communal tension. According to the petitioner, the Association for Protection of Civil Rights, if the hate speech event is allowed to continue, it would lead to a boil in communal tensions."The District authorities are in breach of this Hon’ble Court’s mandate in not instituting a criminal case and immediately prosecuting the habitual offender ... it was incumbent upon State authorities to curb such speech/ mobilization. Non-action results in constitutional harm to the targeted group, since it violates their rights under Article 14, 19 and 21. Lack of decisive criminal action on the letter, and informal mediations that force inequitable compromises add to the constitutional harm ... Permitting a rally that promotes communal frenzy can severely damage communal harmony and social cohesion", the petition filed through advocate Talha Abdul Rahman stated. .The petitioners sought the Court's intervention to uphold fraternity and communal harmony."The instant petition is being filed to prevent communal violence and frenzy being created in Uttarakhand, affecting the fraternity. The instant writ petition seeks directions against Respondents to perform their statutory duty to prevent communally charged atmosphere, communalization, and communal violence by taking necessary preventive and curative steps and to ensure that there is no forced migration of citizens from one area of the country to another area in the name of protecting the “devbhumi”.Such events can deepen divisions among communities, increase polarisation, and lead to hate crimes, it was stressed. "Allowing a rally that incites communal frenzy may contribute to an atmosphere that facilitates hate crimes and communal violence. The authorities have a responsibility to take preventive measures to curb such activities to safeguard the rights and safety of individuals."Accordingly, the plea had sought directions that the respondents to take strict against those concerned, apart from legal measures like ensuring protection to those likely to be affected and prevention of the hate speech event. Further, the petitioner sought the registration of a criminal complaint and an impartial probe into the matter.The Supreme Court had, in October 2022, ordered the Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand Police to take suo motu action in cases of hate speech without looking at the religion of the offenders..The top court had, in April this year, extended the scope of that order to all states and union territories across the country. .Apart from advocates Alam and Rahman, the instant plea was drawn by advocates Archit Krishna, Priya Vats Mohammad Shaz Khan, Tamanna Pankaj, and Adnan Yousuf.
