Allahabad High Court Seeks UP Govt's Response On State Law Commission's Report For Repealing Anti-Beggary Law [Read Order]

The Bench comprising of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Saurabh Lavania issued notice on the petition challenging the Constitutional validity of certain provisions of the said Act, returnable on November 23, 2020.

In November 2017, the Seventh State Law Commission of UP, headed by Justice AN Mittal, had submitted a report, proposing to repeal 1166 "dead enactments" in the State of UP. The Commission had also submitted a Draft Bill titled UP Repealing & Amending Bill, 2018, in this regard.

This report, inter alia, suggested that the UP Prohibition of Beggary Act should be repealed as "the purpose of this Act does not appear to have been achieved."

The Court has now sought response as to the Government's take on this report.

The order has been passed in a petition filed on behalf of one Ashma Izzat, who stated that the Act violates rights protected under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

The Court observed that the Petitioner has not disclosed full particulars as are required under the High Court Rules for maintaining a PIL. It therefore ordered thus:

"Learned counsel for the petitioner is, therefore, permitted to file a supplementary affidavit disclosing the particulars and in the meantime Shri H.P. Srivastava, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents may seek instructions in regard to the recommendation by the VII State Law Commission which had recommended for the repeal of the above Act."

Related News

Last year, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in Suhail Rashid Bhat v. State of J&K & Ors, struck down a similar law in J&K. The High Court had held therein:

"The criminalization of begging, undeniably adversely impacts the most vulnerable people in the society i.e., that group of people who do not have access to basic essentialities as food, shelter, health and criminalization of begging ignores the reality that persons who are begging are the poorest of the poor and the most marginalized in the society."

The Delhi High Court in Harsh Mander v. Union of India struck down the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 and observed,

"The State simply cannot fail to do its duty to provide a decent life to its citizens and add insult to injury by arresting, detaining and, if necessary, imprisoning such persons, who beg, in search for essentials of bare survival, which is even below sustenance. A person who is compelled to beg cannot be faulted for such actions in these circumstances. Any legislation, penalizing the people therefore, is in the teeth of Article 21 of the Constitution of India."

Case Title: Ashma Izzat v. State of UP & Ors.

Appearance: Advocates Shrikant Chaudhary, Amit Kumar Singh, Piyush Mani Tripathi and Vijay Vikram Singh (for Petitioner); Addl. Chief Standing Counsel HP Srivastava (for State)

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order