SC to hear plea against 4 states, Karni Sena for violence over 'Padmaavat'

Agencies
January 25, 2018

New Delhi, Jan 25: The Supreme Court today agreed to hear on Monday two separate petitions seeking contempt action against four state governments and the Shree Rashtriya Rajput Karni Sena for violating its order allowing the all-India release of controversial Bollywood movie 'Padmaavat'.

One contempt petition has been filed by Congress supporter Tehseen Poonawalla, seeking action against governments of Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh for their alleged failure in containing mobs protesting the release of the Deepika Padukone-starrer 'Padmaavat'.

Another similar petition has been filed by lawyer Vineet Dhanda seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against Karni Sena and its office-bearers for allegedly holding violent protest against the movie in several states.

"All fresh petitions will be taken up on Monday," a bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud said.

Both petitions referred to the various apex court orders allowing exhibition of movie in theatres across India with the observation that maintaining law and order is the duty of the state governments.

Initially, the apex court had trashed several petitions seeking a stay on 'Padmaavat's' release on various grounds.

Then the producers moved the court after certain states banned the movie based on the saga of a historic 13th century battle between Maharaja Ratan Singh and his army of Mewar and Sultan Alauddin Khilji of Delhi.

The movie also feature Shahid Kapoor and Ranveer Singh in the lead roles.

The court, on January 18, set aside the ban and restrained other states from banning the movie, paving way for its all-India release on Jauary 25 (today).

Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh had moved the apex court seeking recall of the SC order, which was dismissed on January 23.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.