- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Tripura Communal Violence: Supreme...
Tripura Communal Violence: Supreme Court Grants One More Week's Time To Tripura Govt To Respond To Plea Seeking Independent Probe
Mehal Jain
10 Jan 2022 12:10 PM GMT
The Supreme Court on Monday granted one week's time to the State of Tripura to respond to a writ petition seeking an independent investigation into the communal riots which took place in the State during November last year.When the matter was called out on Monday before the bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta prayed for one week time to be able to...
The Supreme Court on Monday granted one week's time to the State of Tripura to respond to a writ petition seeking an independent investigation into the communal riots which took place in the State during November last year.
When the matter was called out on Monday before the bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta prayed for one week time to be able to file the response.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, for the petitioner-advocate Ehtesham Hashmi, told the bench that notice was issued on November 29, 2021, and further time for filing of reply was taken on December 13, 2021, but till today, no reply has been forthcoming from the state of Tripura in this matter of "serious communal violence".
At this, the SG told the bench, "I will file an affidavit-in-reply in 1 week and will raise certain issues which my learned friend would have to deal with. There are very serious issues".
"I find this practice very strange that notice was received more than a month ago, they asked for further time a month ago, 4 weeks were given, the matter listed was today, and today again they tell the Court that we will need 1 more week for reply? This is encouraging similar acts...", said Mr. Bhushan.
The SG responded, "My learned friend can find many things strange, but what about this selective public interest? I will place this on affidavit! They are lawyers. For one state, they suddenly jump, but there is nothing for other states! Now they have their own team, they go and prepare self-styled documents, they call it a report and then they file a PIL for one state! And I am not going beyond anything in saying this, I will put all this in the affidavit! "
Justice Chandrachud remarked that in the instant matter, "It is important for the court to have the response of the state to do justice". The bench then granted 1 more week's time to the state of Tripura to place on record any further pleadings.
The petition prays for an issue of writ or other direction or order to ensure that an independent, credible and impartial investigation is conducted into the incidents of violence against the Muslim community as evidenced by the fact-finding report titled "Humanity Under Attack in Tripura, #MuslimLivesMatter" dated 02.11.2021 by an SIT or otherwise as deemed appropriate by the Court.
On November 29, 2021, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, for the petitioner, advanced, "We have shown the manner in which the police are investigating the matter, we have mentioned as to what they are not doing which they ought to have been doing- Not registering FIRs, sending 41 a notices to lawyers who had produced that fact-finding report, invoking UAPA against journalists who had reported about this violence, not a single arrest has been made!".
The writ petition is before the Supreme Court of India against alleged targeting of the Muslim community amid Tripura violence in October this year.
The petition has been filed by Advocate Ehtesham Hashmi, seeking an independent and impartial investigation into the alleged incidents of violence, including damaging of mosques, burning Muslim-owned business establishments, shouting Islamophobic slogans, etc.
It is alleged that the Police authorities were hand in glove with the perpetrators, and not a single arrest has been made of the rioters who were responsible for the vandalism and violence.
"The Police and State authorities instead of attempting to stop the violence kept on claiming that there was no communal tension anywhere in Tripura and further denied reports of any mosque being set ablaze," the plea mentions.
It is further averred that the Police authorities failed to lodge FIR's on complaints made by several victims belonging to the Muslim community.
Moreover, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) was invoked against 102 people, including journalists, for reporting and writing on the recent communal violence in the State.
The Petitioner further claims to have personally visited the places where the aforementioned hate crimes were committed to publish a fact-finding report, as per which, 12 Mosques were damaged; 9 shops owned by Muslim businessmen were damaged; and 3 houses owned by Muslims were vandalised.
"A shocking state of affairs where Muslims are openly targeted by rioters and no protection has been extended to them by the Respondents and no arrests of said rioters has been made by the police authorities," the plea states.
The conduct of the police is manifestly arbitrary and mala fide and it affects the victim's right to justice, and is also violative of Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India, it adds.
The Petitioner has therefore urged the Court to define the contours of 'duty of care in investigations' or the tort of negligent investigations resulting in harm.
It is further prayed to ensure compliance with the Supreme Court's directions in Tehseen Poonawalla v. Union of India whereby principles were laid down for preventing and prosecuting all violent hate crimes.
In Tehseen Poonawalla case, the Supreme Court had directed that action must be taken for 'failure to act' by the police, therefore making way for individual criminal responsibility for erring police officials for acts of 'omission or commission', the petition highlights.
Significantly, the Tripura High Court had also taken suo moto cognizance of the incident and recently asked the State government to specify details for computing the amount of compensation awarded in favour of the victims.
Case Title: Ehtesham Hashmi v. Union of India & Ors.
Click Here To Read/Download Order
Next Story
