Read Time: 11 minutes

Synopsis

While emphasising that the court cannot monitor cases in various states while sitting in Delhi, the Supreme Court of India on Tuesday closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW), raising concerns regarding the alarming rise of lynchings and mob violence, particularly acts committed by cow vigilantes.

A writ petition has been filed, seeking the following prayers. Insofar as the first prayer is concerned, it seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authority to act in terms of Tehseen Poonawalla. When directions are issued by this Court, they are binding on all states and courts by virtue of Article 141 of the Indian Constitution. As such, every authority is bound to follow the directions in Tehseen Poonawalla, the court said.

A bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran asserted that if there is non-compliance with the guidelines issued in the Tehseen Poonawalla judgment, an aggrieved person has a legal remedy. "However, sitting in Delhi, we can't monitor incidents in different areas in different states of the country. In our view, such micromanagement would not be feasible. If any other person is aggrieved, they can approach the competent court in accordance with the law," the court added.

Addressing the issue of compensation to victims, the bench noted, "Again, the third prayer is with regard to a direction to the respondent authorities to provide a minimum uniform amount as compensation for injuries, costs, etc., to victims on account of mob lynching. However, what constitutes adequate and reasonable compensation would differ from case to case. Therefore, No uniform direction can be issued to the authorities in this regard."

At the outset, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, mentioned the prayers in the petition. "Writ of mandamus or any other writ order to the respondent authorities in terms of observation made in Tehseen Poonawalla judgment. Direction for respondent authorises to provide immediate interim compensation," the SG said while reading the prayer.

SG Tushar Mehta further submitted that the first part of the prayer was binding on all. He pointed out that in cases of violence, the law would take its course. Under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), mob lynching is a separate offence, he mentioned.

"Milord, now persons from various states keep filing individual IAs. When there can be general direction to follow Tehseen Poonawalla's judgment", SG emphasised. 

However, Advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for NFIW, contended before the bench that in several states, private bodies and individuals are granted police powers in the name of cow protection, allowing them to enter premises and seal vehicles. He told the bench that there is a pattern in the states.

On Justice Gavai's asking," Whether the pattern is identical in all the states?" in response, Advocate Nizam Pasha said that they had identified nearly 13 states, wherein power have been granted to private persons for cow protection purposes.

However, SG Mehta interjected by saying, "Milord, I am appearing for the central government. This matter could be a subject matter of respective high courts. Can the law in the state take care of this, there are session courts, and there are high courts?"

Background

In 2023, the Supreme Court had issued notice in a PIL filed by the NFIW, seeking the court's urgent intervention into the alarming rise in cases of lynchings and mob violence against Muslims despite clear guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in Tehseen S. Poonawalla vs. Union of India & Ors. qua lynchings done by cow vigilantes.

A writ in the nature of mandamus was sought to the concerned State authorities to take immediate action so as to effectively contain and deal with the situation.

The plea mentioned a few incidents of lynching and mob violence that occurred in the last two months (May & June, 2023), and submitted that the State authorities have abjectly failed in making any sincere attempts to tackle this menace and there seems to be no end in sight so far as such incidents are concerned.

"...the present incidents of lynching and mob violence should be seen as the result of the general narrative of ostracization of the minority communities through false propaganda that is being spread by means of public events where hate speeches are made targeting the minorities as well as through social media channels, news channels, and films. The result thereof is that a poison of general communal hate and divide has taken over large portions of the populace. This hatred is the precondition of crimes of lynching and mob-violence...", the plea stated.

The court was told that a minimal action of merely registering FIRs was the only thing that was being done by the authorities in most cases which seemed to be more of a formality than any genuine initiation of the criminal machinery.

The plea further sought directions to ensure immediate relief to the victims of mob violence/lynching, a portion of the total amount of compensation that is to be granted should be given to the victims or their families immediately after the incident as interim compensation.

Case Title: National Federation of Indian Women vs. Union of India & Ors