New Delhi, April 16 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Tuesday, while hearing a petition raising concerns about a rise in incidents of mob violence against minorities, asked the lawyers not to be selective in terms of caste and religion in arguing such cases.
The bench comprising Justice BR Gavai, Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Sandeep Mehta, specifically made the point to the lawyers who had filed the PIL about the murder of Udaipur-based tailor Kanhaiya Lal. Kanhaiya Lal was killed in 2022 for allegedly sharing a social media post of former Bharathiya Janta Party spokesperson Nupur Sharma regarding Prophet Mohammad.
"What about that tailor in Rajasthan..Kanhaiya Lal... who was lynched," the Court asked.
Advocate Nizam Pasha, representing the petitioners National Federation of Indian Women submitted that this incident was not included in the present petition.
The Court said, "You have to ensure that it is not selective at all and all states are included.”
Senior Advocate Archana Pathak Dave representing the Gujarat government remarked that only cases of Muslims being lynched were being highlighted before the court.
The court said such arguments should not be made. “We are saying it is not about religion or caste it has to be about the overall issue which is prevailing," the court said and asked the lawyers to be careful about their submissions in the court.
The bench was hearing the (PIL) petition raising concerns about a rise in incidents of mob violence against minorities and seeking immediate interim compensation for the families of victims of mob lynching.
The apex court had in July last year sought the response of the central government and the police of six states regarding the incidents of mob violence.
The petitioner alleged that the “rampant rise in mob violence and lynching” was the natural consequence of the lack of action by the state, resulting from a "general narrative of ostracisation" of the minority community.
During the hearing, Advocate Pasha submitted that the top court's directions in Tehseen Poonawalla's judgment to prevent mob violence were being violated by states.
While referring to an incident from Madhya Pradesh, he said, "The affidavit by the state shows that it was not mob lynching but a general scuffle. News reports show that it was lynching due to alleged beef transportation. If the state denies the incident, how will the judgment be followed?" Pasha said.
To this, Justice Gavai asked, "Why no FIR was filed against the 10-12 persons who committed battery against the two?"
The counsel representing the state of Madhya Pradesh assured the court that the case would be looked into and the report would be submitted on the next date.
Pasha highlighted a case from Haryana and said, "The best way is to say that there is no mob lynching at all ! That is what is happening," he said.
The court said the states should at least respond to what action has been taken in such cases.
The court adjourned the matter and granted six weeks to all those states which did not file the reply till now, and asked them to file a detailed reply as to what steps have been taken by them in such incidents of mob violence. The matter will now come up for hearing after summer vacations. UNI SNG AKS SSP