Read Time: 09 minutes
Section 144 had been imposed in several parts of Haryana, including Nuh, Gurugram, Faridabad, and other districts, after communal clashes broke out during a religious procession organised by the VHP & Bajrang Dal, after a mob of muslim youth pelted stones on them. On Wednesday, a plea seeking a stay on rallies was refused
The Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta (SG) questioned the bona fides of the petitioner who has approached top court in a plea seeking a stay on VHP-Bajrang dal rallies across Delhi and Haryana, in order to ensure hate speech is not hollered. While the rallies had been planned on August 2 and were to take place in 23 localities in Delhi including at the Delhi-Haryana border, Noida (from Sector 21A to Rajnigandha Chowk), Uttar Pradesh, Manesar, the petitioners' have sought larger prayers concerning law and order problems, allegedly triggered due to the processions.
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SV Bhatti were hearing an interlocutory application filed in the main case concerning hate speech contours after various parts of Haryana saw violence earlier this week. On Wednesday, the bench had refused to stay the rallies and listed the application today.
After the bench told the parties appearing in the case that they must sit down together and sort the issues out, SG informed court that it had become a practice to come to court seeking contemplation and orders on futuristic possibilities of law and order issues.
"Selective people come to court with selective prayers. Hate speech definitions have been laid down in Tehseen Poonawalla case," he pointed out
While the bench said that the police needed to be sensitised to deal with such situations, Senior Advocate CU Singh argued that the issue at hand went way beyond hate speech and it was a call for genocide against one community.
Solicitor General, at this juncture, pointed out that the petitioner had only mentioned selective aspects of the whole communal problem, stating that there are many more clips which should be brought on record.
"In that case, I have access to many more speeches, let me show them to the petitioner and lets see if he amends his petition," he said.
"I will share the clips (which are not stated in Shaheen Abdulla's petition) with Mr. Nizam Pasha so he can place them on record," SG Tushar Mehta added, to which, Advocate Nizam Pasha said, "They make these statements, asking one community to leave, again and again, with impunity - no FIRs".
Finally, when SG said that selectivity in such issues is detrimental, Pasha said that the law officer must not file useless things. To this, the senior law officer said, "Of course not, I just want to test your bona fides, whether you will bring these clips on record as well".
With this heated exchange of words, the bench adjourned the case by two weeks.
2 days ago, the interlocutory application in the main case concerning hate speech was mentioned at 2 pm, in which it has been averred that "considering the extremely precarious situation currently prevailing in the aforementioned areas a very legitimate apprehension of communal persecution has arisen that requires the urgent attention of this Hon’ble Court".
Senior Lawyer CU Singh has then appeared for the petitioner(s) informed court that a rally had already taken place and there was hate speech in it. The bench however pointed out that in October 2022 and April 2023, an order against hate speeches had already been passed and there was no further need of interference. We cannot go this way or that way, said the bench, while confirming with the Additional Solicitor General Mr. SV Raju that proper action will be taken to prevent any kind of violence or law and order situation.
According to the plea, in the rally hosted by Bajrang Dal which is the youth wing of the said VHP on 01.08.2023 at Bhiwani, Haryana participants shouted slogans calling for violence against Muslims [(“Jab Mulle kaate jaayenge, Ram Ram Chillaayenge” (When Muslims will be chopped off, we will shout Ram Ram)].
News reports suggest that a religious procession was being carried out by Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and stone pelting started by a mob of young muslim men, leading to communal violence.
Following this, news of religious violence spread across the Muslim-dominated Nuh district, which further led to stone pelting in parts of in Sohna, Gurugram, Faridabad, and Palwal. Protestors blocked the road and dozens of vehicles and a shop were set ablaze by angry mobs.
Case Title: Shaheen Abdulla Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Please Login or Register
