Uttarakhand Mahapanchayat| High Court Refuses To Direct Registration Of FIR, Says Time Is The Best Healer In Communal Violence
The Uttrakhand High Court today issued notice and directed the State Government to file its Counter-Affidavit in the plea filed by the Association for Protection of Civil Rights seeking action and registration of FIRs against the organizers of the proposed Hindu Mahapanchayat for allegedly creating communal tensions with hate speech against the Muslim community in Purola Village in (Uttarkashi) Uttarakhand.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Rakesh Thapliyal directed maintenance of peace and tranquillity in the State when it was informed by Advocate General SN Babulkar that the said Mahapanchayat has been called off upon the intervention of the state and the situation stands defused to that extent.
The Court in its order observed that "At the outset, the Advocate General Counsel points out that the area in question village Purola falls in District Uttarkashi and not in District Tehri Gharwal and therefore Respondent No. 3 has not been properly impleaded, the petitioner may steps to implead the District Magistrate of Uttarkashi." It further observed that "The Petitioner has preferred this Petition in the public interest to seek directions to the respondent state to take long-lasting steps to prevent, control and mitigate the potential outbreak of large-scale communal violence in public trials and ensure the protection of life, liberty and property of all citizens particularly in District Tehri Garhwal, Uttrakhand."
It was also noted that Hindu Mahapanchayat was scheduled for today i.e. 15th June. "The Petitioner apprehends that the same may lead to communal violence in the area against the Muslim Community. Mr. Babulkar at the outset submits that the said Mahapanchayat has been called off with the intervention of the state and the situation stands defused to that extent", the Court noted.
Appearing for the Petitioner, Advocate Shahrukh Alam referred to the judgment of Shaheen Abdulla where the Supreme Court had directed the Director General of Police Uttarakhand to ensure that immediately, as and when any Hate speech or any action takes place, suo moto action be taken to register cases even if no complaint is forthcoming and proceed against the offenders in accordance with the law. It was also said that any hesitation to act in accordance with this direction will be viewed as contempt of the Apex Court and appropriate action will be taken against the erring officers.
Alam submitted that a letter written by some Hindu group to the administration was received on June 5 and there has been no action for the last 10 days. She said that the organization of both the Hindu Mahapanchayat and the Muslim Mahapanchayat on June 18 need to be curtailed. She also added that Muslim shopkeepers are not being allowed to open their shops and the letter addressed on June 5 categorically mentions that the police should not try to open their shops.
Considering the submissions, the Bench noted that "Ld. Counsel of the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the order passed by the Supreme Court in Shaheen Abdulla vs Union Of India and Ors. on 21.10.2022. The Supreme Court was dealing with a Writ Petition wherein the Petitioner had raised the issue of growing climate of hate in the Country attributable to what is described as hate speeches against the Muslim Community."
Continuing, the Bench said, "The Supreme Court directed inter aia the Director General of Police Uttrakhand to take action against hate speeches being made by any person in the State which attract offences such as Sections 153A, 153B, 295A and 505 of the IPC by taking suo motu steps to register cases even if no complaint is forthcoming and proceed against the offenders in accordance with law."
It was further recorded in the order that, "Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner draws the attention of the Court to all the social media posts attributed to Vishv Hindu Parishad, Bajrang Dal, Tehri Garhwal dated 05.06.2023. At this stage itself, it is observed that the Petitioner has not impleaded the said organization as party respondents."
The Petitioner placed on record a pamphlet which is also posted on social media in relation to Mahpanchayat that was proposed to be called on June 15 at Purola, Uttrakhand. A poster which is allegedly been put up on certain shops belonging to persons of the Muslim community in the area has also been placed on record. Counsel submitted that in respect of the said poster, one FIR against an unknown person has been registered.
It was further submitted that the High Court should issue directions for the administration of FIRs against the persons who are responsible for the communication dated June 5, on the letterhead of Vishv Hindu Parishad, Tehri Garhwal and also against the person who has made the social media post under the name of Dev Bhoomi Raksha Abhiyan.
The Court observed that "Having pursued the communication dated 5.06.2023, we are not inclined to direct the registration of a case, as it will be inappropriate in consideration of the fact that is first and foremost for the police authority to examine whether the commission of a cognizable offence is disclosed and secondly even if police were not to act on the same, it is for the concerned magistrate to examine the said issue in proceedings under Section 156(3) of the CrPC."
The Bench further said in its order that "The direction of the nature sought by the petitioner in these proceedings would lead to undue influence on the concerned statutory authorities. At the same time, we observe that it is the paramount duty of the State to ensure that law and order and peace is maintained in all parts of the state and that there is no loss of life and property of any person in the State. We, therefore, direct Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to take whatever steps are necessary in this regard in fulfilment of the constitutional obligation of the State. Counter Affidavit be filed within 3 weeks."
"The Petitioner and its associates and all the concerned persons shall refrain from participating in social media debates to normalise the situation in the area in question", directed the Bench. While concluding, Chief Justice orally remarked, "What our experience has shown is that whenever there is communal fight or communal violence, time is the best healer."
