NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked state governments to apprise it in six weeks of 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 were 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 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 the 2018 verdict in Tehseen Poonawalla case 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 that have not filed their replies and details of steps taken by them in such cases,” it noted.
Acting on a PIL filed by the 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, Odisha, 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.
The Bench questioned the MP Government counsel as to how an 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?” the Bench asked.