The Supreme Court on Monday requested a farmers’ organisation, which had sought permission to carry a protest at Jantar Mantar towards three agricultural legal guidelines that it was opposing, even though the legal guidelines weren’t enforceable and the court docket stayed has given.
A bench headed by Justice AM Khanwilkar mentioned it is going to study whether or not any one that has already sought treatment from the Constitutional Court has each proper to protest collectively on the streets on the identical concern.
A bench of Justice CT Ravikumar mentioned this within the context of listening to a petition by the Kisan Mahapanchayat searching for permission to carry a protest at Jantar Mantar.
“Having heard the legal professionals, we deem it applicable to look at the problem of precept whether or not the fitting of protest is an absolute proper and furthermore, the writ petitioner is already calling for a authorized treatment earlier than the Constitutional Court by submitting a writ petition. is or must be allowed or could declare the court docket, after listening to counsel for farmers group Ajay Choudhary, Attorney General KK Venugopal and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, mentioned, he can nonetheless take recourse to protest with regard to the identical topic. that are already into consideration.
On the final date of listening to, the court docket had requested the group to file an affidavit stating that it was not a part of the protest blocking the highways.
Choudhary advised the bench on Monday that pursuant to the route, the group had filed an affidavit stating that it was not concerned in any obstruction on any route. “We are separated from other bodies after the 26 January incident”.
The bench then sought the help of the AG and requested, “Once a party moves the court to challenge the validity, where is the question of protesting?”
Agreeing, the AG mentioned, “Your possiblity is right. You can’t get into two houses at the same time. They have chosen their platform.”
“We are on precept. Once you go to court docket and problem the chief motion, how can the identical occasion say that the matter is in court docket, nonetheless I’ll protest.
The group had additionally filed a petition earlier than the Rajasthan High Court difficult the legal guidelines. Choudhary mentioned the petition earlier than the HC “challenges a particular Act on the basis of constitutional provisions”.
“It is still interesting. There is no Act at this time… The court has stayed it. The government has assured that they will not implement it. What is the protest for?”, Justice Khanwilkar requested.
The court docket mentioned it might switch the HC matter to itself and listen to it. “You have insisted and you’ve got challenged the validity of the Act. We will resolve the validity first. Where is the query of protest?”
What is the purpose of protesting at Jantar Mantar?… You can not do each – problem a regulation after which go on protest. Either come to court docket or go to Parliament or go to the street… Once the matter is sub-judice, how will the protest go on the identical concern?”, the court docket requested.
Venugopal mentioned numerous petitions have been filed and added that there must be no protest. He additionally referred to the Lakhimpur violence wherein eight individuals died on Sunday. “Yesterday an unfortunate incident happened in Lakhimpur”, mentioned the AG.
Justice Khanwilkar mentioned, “No one takes responsibility when such incidents happen.” SG Mehta additionally supported the AG and mentioned that “once the matter is before the Supreme Constitutional Court, no one should be on the streets”.
The bench reiterated its query, “Why protest when the regulation just isn’t in power in any respect? The court docket has put it in chilly storage. The regulation is made by the parliament, not the federal government.”
The AG urged the bench to “make it clear that they cannot continue with the protest, unfortunate incidents happen”, however the bench didn’t move any interim route.
It requested the HC in addition to the respondents within the matter filed earlier than it to file their reply, after which the court docket would hear the matter once more.
.
With inputs from TheIndianEXPRESS
