On June 15, the Uttarakhand High Court heard a plea which sought to prevent the Mahapanchayat, called by right-wing groups, from taking place in in Purola town in Uttarakhand’s Uttarkashi. Hearing the arguments made, the Chief Justice of Uttarkhand High Court, Vipin Sanghi, stated that the state has said that the local administration has imposed prohibitory orders till June 19 in Purola town to prevent the gathering from taking place and has also not given permission for the Mahapanchayat to be held on June 15. Issuing an order in the case, he stated that it is the paramount duty of the State to ensure that law, order and peace is maintained and that there is no loss of life and property of any person in the state.
On the issuing of directions for the filing of FIR against the letter of the signatories sent to the DM, the bench said that it is not inclined to direct the registration of case, as it would be inappropriate considering the fact that it first and foremost for the police to examine whether commission of cognizable offence is disclosed. The bench further stated that even if the police is not acting, the petitioners have the right to approach the concerned Magistrate to examine under 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Proceedings (CrPC).It was the opinion of the court that the directions sought by the petitioner would lead to undue influence on the concerned statutory authorities and courts. The court then the directed all respondents to take whatever steps necessary to fulfil their Constitutional obligation to maintain law and order and protect the lives of all.
On Thursday morning three legal interventions (June 14) has been filed before the Supreme Court. One of was a petition by the same petitioners who today approached the Uttarakhand HC, APCR and the other two were letter petitions to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) by academics Apoorvanand and PUCL. By 11.30 a.m. on Thursday June 13 news of 144 being imposed in Purola and the proposed controversial Mahapanchayat being disallowed became public.
Communal tensions have been brewing in Purola and some other towns of Uttarkashi district after two men, one of them Muslim, allegedly tried to abduct a Hindu girl on May 26. The girl was rescued and the accused sent to judicial custody. The Muslim community in the town of Purola have been facing targeted attacks for over 10 days now. On June 6, The Times of India carried prominent reports of Muslim homes being selectively marked with crosses on Purola town. Reports in Hindustan, Hindustan Times and Amar Ujala suggest that many of whom were forced to flee too. The Hindu Mahapanchayat was supposed to be held today, organised mainly the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Bajrang Dal against what they termed incidents of “love jihad”.
The Association for the Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) moved the court after the Supreme Court had yesterday in the day refused to entertain its plea against the Mahapanchayat, but allowed the petitioner to approach the High Court or any other authority.
Advocate Shahrukh Alam, representing the petitioners, brought to the notice of the court that posters, issued in the name of ‘Devbhoomi Raksha Abhiyan’,were stuck on shops and residences of Muslims in Purola, Uttarkashi saying “love jihadists are informed that they should vacate before mahapanchayat”.
Additionally, she referred to the letter sent by fringe outfits to the District Magistrate of New TehriGarwhal, that contained a veiled, unconstitutional threat, “requests to restrict a community in view of rise of population…if members of specified community fail to vacate the area within 10 days, Bajrang Dal and VHP will stage a protest and block the highway…”
Referring to the said letter, Advocate Alam argued that by ignoring this and not acting firmly against the organisers, the district magistrate (DM) is in direct breach of the Supreme Court orders on hate speech, as well as in breach of law for not invoking the sections of UAPA and the IPC, which penalises acts against national integrity and causes disharmony. Furthermore, she highlighted that no FIR has been registered against the signatories of this letter.
Advocate Alam also emphasised that the Muslim Seva Sangathan, an organisation fighting for the rights of Muslims, has also given a call for a Mahapanchayat in Dehradun on June 18, which might lead to more polarisation in the area.
Lastly, the Chief Justice orally stated that there should not be like flare up on social media with allegations and counter allegations, or debates on television or social media. On this, the bench added in its order that the petitioners, its associates and all other concerned shall refrain from participating in social media debates to help in normalising the situation.
Related:
Stop UttarakhandMahapanchayat, could lead to targeted communal violence: Petitions urge CJI
Uttarakhand HC must stop the June 15 Mahapanchayat and assure protection to all citizens
The biggest exodus of the decade: Muslims leave Uttarkashi amidst threats, hate speech
Muslim Mahapanchayat in Uttarakhand to raise concerns over targeting of community
Uttarkashi: Cross marks, “leave” threats on Muslim shops, hatred spreads to other towns: Uttarakhand
Oath for economic boycott of minorities administered in Chhattisgarh
Marginalising the already marginalised: Economic Boycott Targeting Muslims
Are increasing calls for economic boycott of Muslims a sinister precursor to something worse?