|
The Supreme Court on Wednesday verbally observed that the best way to address unrest during student protests is to listen to the concerns of young demonstrators, and that the authorities should tread carefully while acting on acts of violence in a democratic march or agitation.
A bench of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana made the observations while hearing a plea seeking action against the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) over its alleged role in the recent violence during protests in Delhi and other parts of the country, including incidents of stone-pelting. "In a democracy, during such peaceful marches, forces also should exercise restraint. Authorities need to tread very carefully so that youngsters don't indulge in violence. Responding violently would only aggravate the situation. The biggest powerful source is listening, listening to what they are saying and why they are agitating," the CJI observed. The Court further said that while law and order must be maintained, authorities should respond in a cautious manner. "Let us leave it to the wisdom of the law enforcement agency. They know better than us how to deal with the situation. We have heard you. We will take it up on that day. Let us see the view of the Central Government etc.," the Court said to the counsel representing the petitioner. During the hearing, the counsel representing the petitioner, Maneesh Kumar Solanki, argued that the organisers of the protests had triggered widespread disorder and should be held accountable for the violence. He submitted that those organising such demonstrations were "creating mayhem in the nation" and "fanning the fire", by going and speaking on Chanel after TV Chanel. He contended that if the government appeared to be on the back foot, society cannot be on the back foot and the law cannot be on the back foot. The counsel further argued that those responsible for acts such as stone-pelting should not be allowed to escape legal consequences. Referring to the continuing mobilisation of protesters, counsel submitted that more groups were expected to assemble in the coming days and warned that the situation could escalate further if timely action was not taken. He also contended that the CJP was not a registered organisation and had not been granted permission to march to Parliament. Stressing the security implications, he argued that had the protesters entered the Parliament complex, there was no certainty that they were not carrying weapons. Responding to these submissions, the Court observed that it was willing to consider all perspectives. "We are open to all kinds of views and suggestions, including dissenting views," the Court remarked. At the same time, the Court reiterated that while incidents such as stone-pelting could not be condoned and offenders should be dealt with in accordance with law, authorities too must ensure that their response does not aggravate the situation. The Court ultimately ordered that the petition be tagged with the pending batch of cases concerning violence during student protests, which will be heard together on the next date fixed by the Court. (ANI)
|
