Breaking| PIL Against Alleged Attacks On Christians- SC Says It Will Only Consider Implementation Of Its Earlier Judgment, Not Individual Cases
The Supreme Court's Bench comprising of Justice D. Y. Chandrachud and Justice J. B. Pardiwala today said that it will only consider the implementation of its 2018 Judgment of the Court in the matter of Tehseen S. Poonawalla vs Union Of India on curbing mob violence and not individual instances of alleged violence against Christians in the Country that are cited by the Petitioners.
The Supreme Court was hearing a petition filed as public interest litigation by the Archbishop of the Diocese of Bengaluru and some others, including two Christian organizations seeking setting up of an SIT to probe alleged incidents of violence against the Christian community. The Petitioners have also sought police protection for prayer meetings and payment of compensation to the alleged victims of illegal arrest in the community.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the Center requested the Court for an adjournment to file an affidavit. The Bench then remarked that it will only consider what steps have been taken by the states to implement its earlier Judgment and not individual instances.
Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves then told the Court that the Judgment in Poonawalla's case is related to lynching and the directions in the matter will require some tweaking to suit the relief sought in the present case.
The Court will hear the matter on August 16.
"On an average, 45 to 50 violent attacks take place against Christian institutions and priests every month throughout the country", Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves had told the Court while mentioning the matter during the summer vacation for urgent hearing. In May this year itself, 57 cases of violence and attacks on Christian institutions and priests took place, he added.
What you are saying is unfortunate, if it is happening. What we can ensure is that your matter is listed on the re-opening day itself, the vacation Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and J B Pardiwala had said.
When the matter was mentioned again, the Bench expressed displeasure over news reports that it was delaying the hearing of the plea.
Give us a break, the Bench of Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant had said, adding "Last time the matter could not be taken because I was down with Covid. You get it published in newspapers that the Supreme Court is delaying the hearing. Look, there is a limit to which you can target the judges. Who supplies all this news?"
