Supreme Court seeks to know from states steps taken to check incidents of mob lynching, cow vigilantism
New Delhi, April 16
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked state governments to apprise it in six weeks on the action taken in incidents of mob lynching and cow vigilantism even as it took exception to the petitioners taking up incidents on the basis of religion.
“Let’s not go into the incidents on the basis of religion. We should focus on the larger cause,” a Bench led by Justice BR Gavai told petitioners.
The comments from the Bench came after senior advocate Archana Pathak Dave, appearing for one of the states, said there was specific averment made that Muslim men are mob lynched and there was no mention of mob lynching of people of other religion. “The relief sought cannot be religion specific,” she pointed out.
On behalf of the petitioner, advocate Nizam Pasha submitted that there was an incident of alleged mob-lynching in Madhya Pradesh but the FIR was registered for cow slaughter against the victims.
“If the State is to deny the incident of mob lynching, then how can 2018 verdict in Tehseen Poonawalla case will be followed?” Pasha wondered.
The top court deferred by six weeks the hearing on a PIL seeking directions to states to take immediate action in consonance with a 2018 verdict of the apex court to effectively deal with incidents of lynching and mob violence against Muslims by cow vigilantes.
“We find that most of the states have not filed their reply affidavits to the petition giving instances of mob lynching. It was expected of the states to at least respond to what action has been taken in such cases. We grant six weeks to the states which have not filed their replies and details of steps taken by them in such cases,” it noted.
Acting on a PIL filed by National Federation of Indian Women, an organisation linked to the Communist Party of India, the top court had last year issued notices to the Centre and the DGPs of Maharashtra, Orissa, Rajasthan, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Haryana.
The PIL sought direction to the Centre to provide a minimum uniform amount to the victims of such violence in addition to the compensation determined by the respective states after considering the nature of bodily and psychological injury, loss of earning and loss of employment opportunities as also legal and medical expenses.
Holding that the states had the principal obligation to see to it that vigilantism didn’t take place, the top court had issued directions to states to check incidents of cow vigilantism and mob lynching in the Poonawalla case.
The Bench questioned the Madhya Pradesh Government counsel as to how FIR for cow slaughter was registered without chemical analysis of the meat and why no FIR was registered against those involved in the scuffle.
“Are you trying to save someone? How can you register FIR for cow slaughter without even chemical analysis,” the bench told the counsel for Madhya Pradesh and asked him to give details of the incident.
The Bench told Pasha that incidents mentioned in the petitions should not be selectively chosen from particular states but all incidents should be mentioned.
