Not feasible to micro-manage lynching cases: SC
Noting that it’s not feasible to micro-manage cases of mob lynching sitting in Delhi, the Supreme Court on Tuesday disposed of a plea raising related concerns, particularly cow vigilantism against Muslims, saying the issue had already been decided in 2018.
“If the issue is already concluded, can we reopen it by another writ (petition)?” a Bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran asked.
It referred to the top court’s 2018 verdict in which directions were issued to provide “preventive, remedial and punitive measures” to deal with offences like mob violence and cow vigilantism.
“However, sitting here in Delhi, we can’t monitor the incidents occurring in different areas in different states of the country. In our view, such a micro-management by this court would not be feasible,” it said, disposing of a PIL seeking directions to states to take immediate action in consonance with the 2018 verdict to effectively deal with lynching and mob violence.
“When directions are issued by this court, the same are binding on all authorities and courts in the country in view of Article 141 of the Constitution of India,” it said.
It said if there was any non-compliance with the directions issued by the apex court, there was remedy available for the aggrieved person and could approach competent courts.
On the issue of a minimum uniform amount as compensation for injuries caused to the victims of mob lynching, the court said, “Again, as to what could be an adequate and reasonable compensation would differ from case to case.”
It said if a person suffered a simple injury and another one sustained serious injuries in such incidents, a direction to pay a uniform compensation would be unjust, adding the plea seeking such omnibus reliefs would not be in the interest of victims.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Central Government, referred to the 2018 verdict and said the top court had issued detailed guidelines. “Now, under the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, mob lynching is a separate offence,” he said, even as petitioner’s counsel claimed there was “gross non-compliance” of the apex court’s 2018 directions.
