The three-judge bench, comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, expressed strong dissatisfaction with the conduct of the authorities, condemning the Uttar Pradesh government’s actions as “high-handed”, according to Live Law.

During the hearing, the court found that no notice was served to the victim and due process was not followed.

Ref. article: Acquiring land without due procedure would be outside the authority of law, Supreme Court lays down 7 Constitutional tests for land acquisition can be read here

Regarding the failure to serve notice to the victims, CJI Chandrachud further remarked, “This is completely high-handed. Where is the due process? The affidavit shows no notice was issued; instead, you merely informed people at the site through loudspeakers,” as reported by Live Law.

However, in response to the state’s claim that the petitioner had encroached on public land, CJI Chandrachud stressed that, “You say he encroached on 3.7 square meters. We accept that, though we’re not granting him a certificate for it. But how can you start demolishing people’s houses like that? This is lawlessness—walking into someone’s home and demolishing it without notice.”

Public announcement used, not formal notice or due process

Justice Pardiwala also strongly criticized the authorities for relying solely on a public announcement and a drumbeat to notify residents, rather than following proper legal procedures. He remarked that, “You can’t just with the beat of a drum tell people to vacate houses and demolish them. There has to be proper notice.”

NHRC report taken into consideration by court

The bench relied on a report from the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), which found that the highest encroachment in the case was just 3.70 square meters. The NHRC concluded that such a minimal encroachment did not justify demolishing the entire house. Based on its findings, the NHRC recommended granting interim compensation to the petitioner for the wrongful demolition. Additionally, the NHRC called for the registration of an FIR based on the petitioner’s complaint and for the initiation of departmental and punitive action against the responsible officers.

Additionally, the Court observed that the authorities failed to conduct any inquiry to properly demarcate the encroachments. Furthermore, there was no evidence to show that the land had been legally acquired prior to the demolitions.

SC directed UP Govt to pay 25 lakhs as a punitive compensation to the petitioner

The Court directed the State to pay an interim punitive compensation of Rs 25 lakh to the petitioner, emphasizing that this amount would not hinder the petitioner from pursuing additional legal action for further compensation.

Additionally, the Court instructed the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh to conduct an investigation into all officers and contractors involved in the illegal demolitions, and to initiate appropriate disciplinary action. The Court also clarified that the State could pursue criminal action against those responsible. These directions must be implemented within one month.

Furthermore, the judgment outlined the procedural steps that state authorities must follow before carrying out any demolition for road-widening projects. According to Bar and Bench, the Court also ordered all States to adhere to the following while carrying out widening of roads:

While carrying road widening, States must ascertain:

– Existing width of road;

– If encroachment is found, notice has to be issued to remove the encroachment;

– If objection is raised, then a decision on objection should be rendered by way of a speaking order in compliance with natural justice principles;

If rejected, then reasonable time should be given to (the encroacher) to remove encroachment.

A copy of the ruling was ordered to be circulated to all States and Union Territories to ensure compliance.

Case Title: In Re Manoj Tibrewal Akash [W.P.(C) No. 1294/2020]

Related:

Acquiring land without due procedure would be outside the authority of law, Supreme Court lays down 7 Constitutional tests for land acquisition

Supreme Court rebukes “Bulldozer Justice,” plans to issue nationwide guidelines to prevent arbitrary demolitions

Supreme Court warns against ‘bulldozing the rule of law,’ affirms that legal process, not allegations, must govern punitive actions

The post Bulldozer Justice: you can’t just roll in with bulldozers and demolish homes overnight: SC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On June 21, 2022, the State of Uttar Pradesh submitted an affidavit before the Supreme Court justifying the demolitions undertaken in Kanpur and Prayagraj, claiming they were legal and compliant with provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973.

The said affidavit was filed in response to the two Intervention Applications (IAs) filed by Jamiat-Ulama-I-Hind on June 13, in connection with the demolitions of homes of alleged rioters in Uttar Pradesh.

The State submitted that the Petitioner cherry-picked two demolition actions of illegal constructions in the properties of one Mr. Ishtiaq Ahmad and one Mr. Riyaz Ahmed that took place in Kanpur in an attempt to falsely link the same to the rioting, and that in both cases, certain portions of the two illegal/non-compliant structures in question took place; that both buildings were under construction and not in conformity with the permission granted and that most importantly, proceedings under the Urban Planning Act against the two buildings had been initiated by the Kanpur Development Authority long before the incidents of rioting that took place in June 2022.

With respect to the Prayagraj demolition, the State submitted that the proceedings under the 1973 Act and Rules by the Prayagraj Development Authority against Javed Mohammed (husband of Parveen Fatima) had been initiated much prior to the incidents of rioting for illegal construction and unauthorised use of land as an office.According to the State, the illegal construction had been demolished only after due service and providing adequate opportunity under Section 27 of the Act.

It is the case of the State, that the Javed Mohammed and his family was served with a demolition order/notice dated May 25, 2022,and only because the notice failed to comply with the said order and remove the unauthorized construction himself, the noticee was served with a final notice dated June 10, 2022, directing them to vacate the premises by 11:00 A.M on June 12, 2022, so that the demolition of the building could be carried out. It submitted that the notice was even attempted to be hand delivered but the family members refuse to take the notice and therefore, the notice was served in accordance with Section 43(1)(d)(ii) of the Act by pasting it on the wall of the building.

These facts have been expressly denied by Parveen Fatima, the actual sole owner of the house, in a writ petition filed before the Allahabad High Court on June 20. She as first petitioner, and her daughter Sumaiyya, as second petitioner, have called out the government, denied the May 10, 2022 notice and called these “manufactured documents.”

Two days ago, on June 20, a full eight days after the demolition, Parveen Fatima, wife of Javed Mohammed, and their daughter Sumaiyya Fatima approached the court for full and fair restitution in a detailed writ petition. Afreen Fatima, former student activist is the elder daughter of the first petitioner. It was the petitioner’s case that JK Ashiana, the decades old family home of Parveen Fatima in Kareli, Allahabad, was passed on to her by her father through a legal deed in 1996.

The petition alleges that Parveen Fatima and her entire family have been subject to hostile discrimination and indignity, deprived of their valuable legal and constitutional rights under Articles 14, 21 and 300. Post-facto, the demolition is even being justified on the basis of manufactured documents (notices) now being cited by the government and authorities.

The illegal demolition was resorted to after the husband of the petitioner was arrested and thereafter, both the women Petitioners were forcibly taken from house to Mahila Thana. These are violations of set guidelines by the Supreme Court of India.

The petition states that, in order to execute this plan of illegal demolition, on the night of June 11, 2022, a pre-dated notice dated June 10, 2022, was pasted on the front wall of the house of Parveen Fatima by the Prayagraj Development Authority through its Joint Secretary/Zonal Officer informing that the house should be vacated by 11 A.M of the next day, i.e June 12, 2022 and that the house shall be demolished. Falsely, the June 10, 2022 notice mentions that a month earlier, a notice had been served on the family which the petitioners, on oath state that they have never received.

Ironically, the gross illegality if apparent in the fact that the so-called notice was served on Mohammad Javed who is not even the legal owner of the home. All bills, land, electricity and water have been duly and promptly paid and there are records of the same. The petitioners state clearly that no notices of May 25, 2022 and June 10, 2022 were ever served on the owner of the house, Parveen Fatima. These notices were not served on Javed Mohammad or any other member of his family either. The petitioners have clearly stated that these are manufactured documents. The only time that the notice was seen was the one dated June 10, 2022, posted on the wall of house in the night of June 11, 2022, was addressed to Javed Mohammad, who is neither the owner of the house nor has any share in the property.

Parveen Fatima is sole owner of the property. The Petitioners had no occasion to reply to this allegation as they did not receive any notices, as mentioned above. Like all others in the locality, who are similarly situated, the Petitioner No. 1 has been regularly paying all these years the house tax, water tax and electricity bill of the house and at no juncture, any objection was raised by the departments. More details on the said petition maybe readhere.

While these generalities in the state of UP’s affidavit datedJune 21, 2022

In its reply, the State alleged that the petitioner has attempted to give malafidecolour to the lawful action taken by the local development authorities as per procedure established by law by cherry-picking one sided media reporting of a few incidents and extrapolating sweeping allegations from the same against the State.

It further submitted that the demolitions referred to in the IAs had been carried out by the Local Development Authorities, which are statutory autonomous bodies, independent of the State administration, as per law as part of their routine effort against unauthorised/illegal constructions and encroachments, in accordance with the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1972.

Moreover, the State alleged that the Petitioners are seeking an omnibus relief and there is no occasion to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The State is of the opinion that it is the affected parties who are to seek relief and that too before the High Court.

Also, the State further argued that it has taken strong exception to the attempt by the Petitioner to name the highest constitutional functionaries of the State and falsely colour the local development authority’s lawful actions strictly complying with the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, as “extra legal punitive measures” against accused persons, targeting any particular religious community.

Finally, the Government urged the Supreme Court to hold the petitioners to terms for the false allegations that are made without any basis.

On June 13, the vacation bench of Justices AS Bopanna and VikramNath ordered that no out of turn demolitions are to take place pending the court proceedings. While the Court did not order a complete stay on the demolitions, the court prohibited the Uttar Pradesh government from carrying out demolition activities without following the due process of law. The court reportedly stated, “Action will only be in accordance with law.”

“We also keep seeing, we are also part of society. We also see what’s happening. Sometimes we have also formed some impressions. In someone’s case of grievance, if this court doesn’t come to rescue, it’s not proper. We have a duty. We should ensure safety in the meantime. It should look fair,” said Justice Bopanna.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had argued that the petitioner JamiatUlama-I-Hind is not the affected party to approach the court.  He reportedly stated, “Someone has to come and say on the affidavit that the law is not followed. It’s an omnibus petition by an omnibus organisation seeking omnibus relief.”

However, Justice Bopanna remarked, “We have to be conscious of the fact that those people whose houses are demolished may not be able to approach the Court.”

Latest Intervention Applications

JUIH was the original petitioner in the matter pertaining to the demolitions carried out in Delhi’s Jahangirpuri area. It has now sought an urgent and comprehensive stay on demolitions as well as related directions to the state of Uttar Pradesh and its police force to refrain from illegal and malafide actions in demolishing homes of alleged accused in Kanpur, Saharanpur and Prayagraj (Allahabad).

The first plea, filed afresh now, on June 12, relates to Kanpur demolitions in particular, has sought a stay on any further demolition drives that the authorities may be planning to carry out in Kanpur district, which witnessed violence during the protests earlier this month. Kanpur was the first city in India to experience violence following the protests against (the now suspended) BJP spokesperson, Nupur Sharma.

On the afternoon of June 3, following Friday prayers, attempts to shut down shops had resulted in stone pelting and violence by the police. Following its now established high-handed and unlawful procedure, the authorities had proceeded to name, blame and then proceed to demolish the homes/properties of alleged accused behind the violence. The Jamiat said in its fresh plea that following the violence in Kanpur, “a number of persons in authority have stated in the media that the properties of suspects/ accused would be confiscated and demolished.”

“Even the Chief Minister of the state has said in the media that the houses of accused persons would be razed using bulldozers. The Additional Director General (Law and Order), Mr. Prashant Kumar, and Commissioner of Police of Kanpur, Mr. Vijay Singh Meena, too, has reiterated that the properties of the accused would be seized and demolished,” the application states.

The plea urged the top court to direct the UP government to ensure that “no precipitative action be taken in Kanpur District against the residential or commercial property of any accused in any criminal proceedings as an extra-legal punitive measure.” An article in The Hindustan Times had reported these statements of the top echelons of the police. Other media reports had revealed that of the three FIRs registered by the Kanpur police, in which 1,000 unnamed accused were listed, 55 named accused were all Muslim suggesting a partisan gaze.

The second intervention application, relates to the brazen demolition in Prayagraj (Allahabad) that was carried out in full public view on June 12, on the home of Parveen Fatima, mother of youth activist Afreen Fatima and wife of political activist Javed Mohammad. Claiming (without any investigation) that Javed Mohammad was one of the “masterminds” in the Prayagraj stone pelting that took place last Friday, the UP police – after serving a hurried post-dated one-day previous notice – had simply arrived on the spot in Kareli and brought down Parveen Fatima’s ancestral home last Sunday. An intimidating presence of 2,000 plus police and riot police prevented any citizens from protesting this brazenly illegal act.

The second intervention application states that the Prayagraj administration cited violation of building norms and demolished the house. The IA also states that the police have handed over a preliminary list of 37 accused in the protests to the Prayagraj Development Authority (PDA) to check for irregularities in their properties — and take action, if needed, including demolition. All these persons face a potential threat of the same kind faced by the family of Afreen Fatima.

Explicit directions have been sought from the Supreme Court by the petitioner/intervener to “ensure that any demolition exercise of any nature must be carried out strictly in accordance with applicable laws, and only after due notice and opportunity of hearing is given to each of the affected persons.” It also prayed for directions that “residential accommodation” or “any commercial property cannot be demolished as a punitive measure.”

Stating that such a “demolition exercise of any nature must be carried out strictly in accordance with applicable laws, and only after due notice and opportunity of hearing to each of the affected persons — as mandated by this Hon’ble Court”, the IA seeks judicial intervention on the high-handed activities of the executive.

The applications point out that even under Section 10 of the Uttar Pradesh (Regulation of Building 7 Operations) Act, 1958, demolition of a building shall not be undertaken unless the affected person is given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Further, Section 27 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 also requires that the affected person be heard before proceeding with the demolition and be given at least 15 days’ notice. Moreover, as per the Act a person aggrieved with order of demolition is entitled to appeal against it to the Chairman within a period of 30 days of the order.

Therefore, it has been stated that the decision of proceeding with demolition of properties of accused persons is clearly illegal and doing so without providing a reason for the opportunity of hearing is also in violation of the municipal laws of the state, as well as violating principles of natural justice. Hence, such plans of the state of proceeding with vengeance are against our democratic values and resultantly, weaken the justice delivery system of the state. Based on the law, the interveners argue that it would be in the interest of justice that any demolition drive that the authorities are planning to carry out in Kanpur District, Prayagraj (Allahabad), Sahranpur or anywhere in Uttar Pradesh are stayed during the pendency of the instant writ petition.

Related:

Demolitions by the playbook, unprecedented even in pre-independence India: Senior Counsel to SC in Bulldozer Injustice case
SC to hear urgent petitions against UP demolitions today
Bulldozer Injustice: Homes of June 10 rioters to be demolished?
Anti-CAA Muslim activist Afreen Fatima’s family members illegally detained!
Spontaneous pan-India protests against Nupur Sharma
Friday protests: More people booked for unlawful assembly
Why is Jharkhand governor in favour of doxing alleged riot participants’ names?
Friday protests: At least 325 arrests in UP alone!
Jahangirpuri Demolition: SC to take “serious view of demolitions after Mayor was informed of order”
Bengaluru Police raid, tear down homes of Bengali Muslim migrants

The post Allegations of selective demolitions are false, Due process of law followed: UP gov’t to SC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Uttar Pradesh government continues to harass those accused of participating in anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in the 2019. The state government has initiated fresh proceedings against them for allegedly damaging public property.

Since the state government failed to recover the damages in its previous attempt under Supreme Court orders, they now decided to claim damages through the Claims Tribunal established under the Uttar Pradesh Recovery of Damages to Public and Private Property Act, 2021. The earlier notices that were withdrawn after Supreme Court took the state government to task, were issued by district administration, and now it is the Claims Tribunal that is issuing similar notices.

As per the Uttar Pradesh Recovery of Damages to Public and Private Property Act, 2021, persons found guilty by claims tribunals of damaging government or private properties will face imprisonment of one year or a fine ranging between Rs 5,000 and Rs 1 lakh.

Advocate Najmu Saqib, who is part of a team of lawyers representing the 21 accused from Kanpur, says that despite the Supreme Court’s order to refund those that had already paid the damages, the accused from Kanpur have still not received the refund amount. Saqib told the Indian Express, “The Supreme Court had ordered the UP government to refund the money recovered from the accused. But no money has been given to any of the 21 people. Instead, the Claims Tribunal has now issued fresh notices against those who had paid the administration.”

On being confronted, UP Advocate General Raghvendra Singh said, “If they are found innocent during the proceedings, they will get the money back. I don’t know this matter in great detail.”

Earlier Notices withdrawn

Last month, after severe criticism from the Supreme Court, the Uttar Pradesh government on February 18, 2022 withdrew its 274 notices against people who had protested the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) for recovery of alleged damages to public property prior to the issuance of the related law in 2020.

The Supreme Court Bench of Justices D. Y. Chandrachud and Surya Kant questioned the state government about adjudicating the recovery notices via Additional District Magistrates (ADMs) and not judicial officers, as mandated by the court. It gave the government seven days of time to show how the notices to 2019 protesters “were not in contravention to Supreme Court directions”. The court warned that it will quash the notices itself, if they fail to do so.

Accordingly, UP Additional Advocate General Garima Prashad said that the government withdrew the notices on February 14 and February 15 and directed the cases to be overseen by the Tribunals constituted under the Recovery of Damages to Public and Private Property Act 2021. Further, the Bench directed the government to refund any damage recoveries collected under the previous order. “This will however be without prejudice to such action as may be warranted in terms of the proceedings before and the decision of the Claims Tribunal at a subsequent stage,” said the Bench.

However, according to LiveLaw, Prashad unsuccessfully contested this saying, “Order of refund would send the wrong message.” She said the release of refunds and attachments will be difficult due to the Model Code of Conduct enforced in the state. According to the state government representative, the refund will send a message to the public that “the entire process is illegal and no such recovery can be made.”

Still, the Bench called for the refund citing Article 142 and its constitutional duty to enforce judicial orders to keep people from running around.

During earlier proceedings, the court had pulled up the UP government for ignoring its orders, saying, “You have become complainant, you have become adjudicator, and then you are attaching property of the accused.”

The Bench was hearing a plea filed by ParwaizArifTitu in January 2020, asking that the notices against alleged anti-CAA protesters be quashed for violating SC’s 2009 and 2018 rulings.

What had the UP government done to anti-CAA protesters? 

Since the discriminatory Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019 was introduced and passed in Parliament, and threats of the implementation of an all-India Nation Register of Citizens (NRC) and National Population Register (NPR) made repeatedly, spontaneous protests broke out across the country. People challenged the discriminatory nature of the amendment that excluded the Muslim community from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan. A unified resistance built up against these discriminatory legislative and policy moves. 

However, the ruling BJP government cracked down hard on these protests. The most brutal was perhaps the state sanctioned actions in UP where police lathi-charged and allegedly even fired at unarmed protesters. As many as 23 people died due to this, and around 350 FIRs were filed against at least 1,05,000 people.

At the time, the government and administration also displayed posters and hoardings throughout the state capital of Lucknow of alleged anti-CAA protesters in a crude and illegal way of ‘naming’ and shaming them. As many as 57 persons were named and with their addresses and photographs put up on posters and hoardings. They were accused of being part of the violence during the protests. The alleged protestors were also arbitrarily asked to pay huge sums compensation for “damage to public property” that took place during the violence at the protest in December, 2019. The hoardings also said that if these people fail to pay up, their properties will be attached/confiscated. The total amount of damage to property listed in the hoardings was up to Rs. 1.55 crore. 

According to a recent APCR report on the anti-CAA protests and ensuing violence, people who were illegally arrested and tortured in prison for two years were also given damage notices. Their families paid the money in the police station while they were incarcerated. Following people’s bail, the state police refused to return the amount. It is for these people that the SC has demanded a refund.

Before putting up these posters, the UP Chief Minister had declared that properties of those involved in the violence would be seized and auctioned to compensate for destruction of public and private assets during the protests over the amended citizenship law and issued three recovery orders for the same.

Former Inspector General of Uttar Police S R Darapuri and Congress leader Sadaf Jafar, were among 46 people who were each issued recovery orders with the same amount — Rs 64.37 lakh — from the ADM (Lucknow East). Both had denied that they were present at the site of the protests. Jafar, who contested the UP polls from Lucknow (Central), called the notices “illegal and unconstitutional” and Darapuri was quoted by IE as saying that the “procedure followed by the UP government to serve notices to us was against the apex court guidelines. I am glad the court has established the rule of law, and I am hoping that it will soon quash the proceedings on its own when the matter is heard next.”

After retirement, Darapuri dedicated himself to speaking up on issues regarding Dalits, Adivasis and minorities. He was 76 years old when he was arrested on December 20, 2019, after he called for a political but non-violent protest against CAA. He was released on bail in January 2020. 

Jafar was also arrested and after she was released on bail in January, she publicly alleged that she was “tortured in police custody and called a Pakistani” when she was in jail. “Women police officers dragged me by my hand to the corner of the street and started beating me with a baton on my legs,” she recalled and also that they had kept saying, “Oh she’s Muslim.” 

Related:

Supreme Court takes UP gov’t to task over notices issued to anti-CAA protestors
Under fire from SC, UP gov’t withdraws damage notices against anti-CAA protestors

The post Despite SC rap, UP Claims Tribunal issues notice to recover damages from anti-CAA protesters! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

There were at least 102 cases of persecution of Christians in Uttar Pradesh in 2021, reported the Alliance for Defending Freedom (ADF) in a list detailing the various acts of aggression against the minority group. Scouring newspaper and media reports, the Delhi-based organisation detailed the various instances between January 3, 2021 and December 28, 2021 including allegations of forced conversion, church attacks and even aggression by the police at times. The list gives serious credence to claims of minority oppression by rights defenders like Father Anand IMS.

“Uttar Pradesh was a peaceful state once. There were no incidents of such attacks. However Christian persecution has increased in the last five years. Nowadays, such attacks have become a regular thing,” said Fr Anand.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in its ‘Lok Kalyan Sankalp Patra’ manifesto for UP elections 2022 said that it will “continue the action against goons, criminals and mafia with the same firmness”. However, Christians remain suspicious of such assurances, especially in wake of incidents where police either participated or were complicit in other ways in their persecution.

For example, on December 19, Lakhimpur Kheri’s Pastor Arun Kumar of AG Church was conducting a prayer service in the church when local police barged in, disrupted the service and detained Kumar along with his son Blesson. On reaching Bhira police station, authorities said that few religious extremists had alleged religious conversion at the place.

“Christians are traumatised,” said Fr Anand recalling another incident on December 21 when some fundamentalists raised offensive slogans outside a church.

Police failing in its duty

As per the ADF, there were 2 attacks on Christians in January, 3 attacks on Christians in February, 3 attacks on Christians in March, 1 attack on Christians in April. The number and frequency rose drastically from then with 10 attacks in June, 8 attacks in July, 17 attacks in August, 19 attacks in September, 20 attacks in October, 7 attacks in November and 12 attacks in December.

Of these, one of the most deplorable attacks took place on February 21, inside Pastor Anjeet Kumar’s home. Kumar had called his family and other church members to his home in Ambedkar Nagar to conduct his Sunday fellowship. However, villagers Ramsajivan, Krishna Kumar, Ramnath, Rohit, Mayaram, Abhimanyu, and Vasant interrupted the ongoing service by hurling abuses and threatening Christians. Village head Uday Singh accused the group of forced conversion. Finally, four police officers from Bhiti police station arrived at the place.

Shockingly, they did not arrest the aggressors but prohibited Pastor Anjeet from inviting anyone from the community for prayers. The personnel made the victim write a statement specifying that he will not invite any friend or relative to his house for religious gatherings.

In another incident on April 19, Simon Johnson alias Sadanand Kumar from Maharajganj, voluntarily changed religion and his name, but subsequently faced constant harassment from his family. A fully-blind teenager, he embraced Christianity and claimed it helped heal his body. He also went to Chennai for a short-term bible training. But upon his return, the youth has been harassed by his family and has had to spend many nights without food and got help only from some Christian families in the village.

On October 1, Bikapur police in Faizabad detained Pastor Ravinder Kumar and around 40 Christians including women and children. The group were preparing to pray together when the Tehsildar barged in with the Station House Officer (SHO), Circle Officer (CO) and Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM), and alleged that the group was forcefully converting people.

In the same month on October 6, Pastor Ram Vachan Bind said his son Bablu from Narvari Dhaka village of Azamgarh was verbally abused and threatened by religious extremists as well as the police. Around 20 to 30 Christians had gathered for a prayer meeting in the church when 10 to 15 religious extremists verbally abused, threatened and physically assaulted people. They further destroyed a chair and the plastic sheet. However, when the victims called the police from the Panwai police station, the police took Bablu and seven other people into custody!

Later in the same month, on October 10, the same thing happened while Pastor Bablu was conducting a prayer meeting. As many as 10 religious extremists came and physically assaulted attendees, including women. They stole earrings of some women and fled.

Apathy of contesting parties

While many rights activists accused the BJP for these growing instances of hate, other political parties have also not been successful in curbing hate crimes in their area. For example, the aforementioned incident took place in Azamgarh district which has a larger influence of the Samajwadi Party (SP) and the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP). Yet such incidents are prevalent here.

On June 25, another pastor in Sumbhi village of Azamgarh was accused of religious conversion. This time, Pastor Bhanu Pratap faced allegations by local villagers. The villagers filed a police complaint against him in this regard. As per the ADF Pratap ran before the police could arrest him.

Similarly, in Milak Bakar Ali village of Rampur – another region with SP influence – police detained two Christians Raman and Shibdesh from their home on June 26. The police said the two men allegedly carried out forced conversions.

The SP in its ‘Samajwadi Vachan Patra’ manifesto promised a “zero tolerance” policy against organised hate crimes, especially against women, Dalits and minorities. However, with more than 100 horrifying incidents of attacks on Christian across constituencies, it remains to be seen which party will have a greater pull on the community.

Related:

Paigam-e-Mohabbat: UP citizens call for harmony

Cardinal, CBCI must ask PM to respond to attacks on Christians in India: FRJ

To wear or not to wear the Hijab is not the point!

Charting Hate in India 2021

The post Are Christians being targetted in Uttar Pradesh with the blessings of the regime? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As many as 11 families, all hailing from the minority community, have been allegedly asked to vacate their homes located near the Gorakhnath temple in Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh, reveals a shocking report in The Quint. The families were all made to sign “consent letters” saying that they would willingly vacate their homes to enable better security arrangements around the temple.

Land surrounding the temple, of which Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Adityanath is incidentally the chief Mahant (priest), is being acquired by the UP government purportedly to build a police booth. The Gorakhnath temple complex is spread over 52 acres. According to The Wire, there is a police booth inside the temple complex and a police station is located near the temple’s main gate. It I salso noteworthy that surrounding areas such as Naurangabad, Zahidabad, Purana Gorakhpur, Humayunpur and Rasulpur are predominantly inhabited by Muslim families, most of whom are traditionally engaged in weaving and allied activities.

According to The Quint, the ‘consent letter’ says, “In the surrounding of Gorakhpur temple, keeping in mind the security, the administration has decided that in the southeast side of the temple in Tappa town in the Sadar area, the people named below will give our land to the state government and our signature stands as proof for the same. We have no objections to giving our land away. Please find enclosed signature below.”

However, some families told media persons that they had been pressured into signing the letter.

71-year-old Javed Akhter, a retired engineer with the Indian Railways, told Al Jazeera that Gorakhpur district officials including policemen visited his house and took measurements. They handed him a letter signed by a few other families and asked him to sign as well. “The officials told us that if we do not sign the letter, they have other ways to get our signatures as well. We were pressured,” he said.  

Meanwhile, 70-year-old Musheer Ahmed told The Quint that only Muslim families were asked to sign the letter as there were no homes owned by Hindu families in the area. “No Hindu family has a house here. Only 11 Muslim families had to sign it. We have been living here for over 125 years,” he said lamenting he had nowhere else to go.  

However, Gorakhpur District Magistrate (DM) Vijyendra Pandian rubbished claims that people were made to sign the letter under duress. He told The Quint, “Where are we putting pressure on them? This entire process is in a nascent stage. These men have signed on their own and initiated these proceedings.” He further said, “They are getting a good quantum of money, running into crores of rupees, which is why they signed and they are also getting an alternative piece of land. The entire process is in a preliminary stage so the quantum of money was only informally communicated as it is not supposed to be disclosed in the media. Now they are playing politics.”

Meanwhile, Shahnawaz Alam, president of the state minority cell released an audio recording of the DM allegedly accusing Masihuzzama Ansari, a staff correspondent with India Tomorrow of falsely adding a communal hue to the story, “Please leave your religion behind when you report. Why are you spreading false information?” He then goes on to say that people spreading false information will be charged under the National Security Act.

अपनी नहीं तो अपने पद और गोरखनाथ जी की गरिमा का खयाल रखें योगी जी |
पत्रकार को एनएसए लगाने की धमकी देने वाले गोरखपुर डीएम का ऑडियो किया जारी
बिना सहमति के जबरन मुसलमानों की जमींन छीनने का मामला |@INCUttarPradesh@priyankagandhi@ShayarImran@TirangaBhaiya
https://t.co/BvNCuB8Lli

— Shahnawaz Alam (@UPkaAlam) June 4, 2021

Related:

Yet another demand for ASI survey in UP, plea to look for idols buried under mosque
Gyanvapi case: Pleas before Allahabad HC challenging ASI survey order
Krishna Janmabhoomi: Plea in Allahabad HC to remove Idgah Mosque

The post Were minority community families asked to vacate homes near Gorakhnath temple? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Following vehement dissent from Uttar Pradesh’s teachers union, the state government asked the State Election Commission (SEC) to amend its rules regarding compensation for families of all polling officials who died of Covid-19 after panchayat election duty.

According to The Hindu, the state government on May 20, 2021 suggested that the SEC include more people in its list of panchayat poll duty casualties owing to Covid-19. The decision came in the wake of a detailed list submitted by the Uttar Pradesh Primary Teachers Association that put the figure at 1,621 deaths across the state, as opposed to the government’s tally of just three people!

The union demanded a compensation of Rs. 1 crore each family. At the time, the demand was rejected by the State Basic Education Minister Satish Dwivedi claiming that as per guidelines, only three people died during election duty i.e., while travelling from home to the location where they were to report for duty.

However, during a high-level meeting, Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath said these guidelines need to be looked into to include Covid-like situations as well. Accordingly, he told the Chief Secretary and Additional Chief Secretary to speak to the SEC regarding amendment of guidelines.

Adityanath said the government is ready to provide all necessary facilities to its employees, especially at a time when they have done election or any other duty. Moreover, acknowledging the number of orphaned children during the Covid-crisis, he called for a detailed plan from the Women and Child Development Department for maintenance and proper care of such kids.

Meanwhile, in a previous letter, the teachers union made the following demands as compensation:

• Teaching posts for all dependents appearing for BTC, B.Ed, D.L. Ed and clerical jobs for others.
• Pre-April-1-2005 pension system for aggrieved families and gratuity for families of teachers aged 60 years and younger.
• Relief from duty for teachers and staff who continue to work in Covid-Control rooms.
• Provision of the title ‘Covid warriors’ for all members who died during election duty.
• Government assistance in paying medical fees of Covid-recovered teachers and staff.

Related:

UP: 1,621 people on polling duty dead, but gov’t recognises only 3!
UP Panchayat elections: Candidates die before results are declared!
SHOCKING: Covid kills over 700 teachers, 300 still critical in UP!
UP: Covid crisis claims at least 706 primary teachers and kin owing to election duty!

The post UP govt asks SEC to consider wider compensation for dependents of deceased polling officials appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Uttar Pradesh government has filed a plea before the Supreme Court against the Allahabad High Court order granting bail on the ground of apprehension of death on account of the Covid-19 pandemic.

On May 10, the Allahabad High Court passed an order observing that apprehension of death on account of reasons like the present pandemic is a valid ground for grant of anticipatory bail. The order was passed by Justice Siddharth while hearing an anticipatory bail application of one Prateek Jain, who was accused of cheating along with other co-accused who are directors of a builder company. Jain argued that he was only related to the other co-accused and was falsely implicated in the case.

While considering the bail application, the court had observed thus, “The established parameters for grant of anticipatory bail like the nature and gravity of accusation, the criminal antecedent of the applicant, the possibility of fleeing from justice and whether accusation has been made for injuring and humiliating the applicant by getting him arrested have now lost significance on account of present situation of the country and the State on account of spread of second wave of novel corona virus.”

The court further added, “In such uncertain times it would be against the requirement of Article 14 of the constitution of India, which provides equality before law and equal protection of law, to leave an accused unprotected from arrest and suffer the consequences of being infected with novel corona virus”.

While mentioning the matter before a bench of Justices Vineet Saran and BR Gavai Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that the accused was a conman and had been granted anticipatory bail solely on the basis of Covid-19.

The Allahabad High Court order may be read here:

Related:

Medical system in rural Uttar Pradesh is ‘Ram Bharose’: Allahabad HC
Uttar Pradesh: Bodies in the river, more buried in the sands, tell tales of Govt apathy
Form Public Grievance Committee, submit vaccine plan for disabled and labour class: Allahabad HC

The post UP govt challenges HC order granting bail on apprehension of contracting Covid-19 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On February 9, Justices Ashok Bhushan and Subhash Reddy granted Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Sanjay Singh protection from arrest in all hate speech FIRs against him and issued notice to the State on why FIRs should not be clubbed.

Since Singh is a Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha, the top court said that the Uttar Pradesh government can approach the Chairman, Rajya Sabha for sanction for prosecution under section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bench also highlighted the nature of the issue and said, “The matter needs to be finally decided on the next date. List the matter in the third week of March, 2021.”

According to the Indian Express, during the hearing, Senior advocate Vivek Tankha and advocate Sumeer Sodhi (appearing for Sanjay Singh), said that no procedures were followed by the police in lodging the case and sanction to prosecute the Rajya Sabha MP was also not taken. The Bench said that it will not get into the sanction aspect at this moment but it does not mean that no offence has been made out against Singh.

Last year, Sanjay Singh was charged under sections 153A, 153B, 501, 505(2) of the Indian Penal Code in Lucknow, wherein he had alleged that the state government was favouring one particular caste over the others at a press conference. LiveLaw reported that he had merely raised certain social issues, namely neglect and apathy of the government towards a certain class of society.

Thereafter, multiple FIRs were registered against him at the instance of the BJP members in various police stations in different districts of Uttar Pradesh. According to LiveLaw, Sanjay Singh said that the writ petition has been filed by him for direction to quash the FIRs registered against him, as these are “manifestly attended with malafide and have been maliciously instituted to unleash political vendetta against the petitioner and to harass him.”

The matter will tentatively be listed in March and the apex court issued directions: “In the meantime, we direct that the petitioner be not arrested in Crime No. 221 of 2020 under Sections 153A, 153B, 501, 505(2), IPC registered at P.S. Hazratganj, Lucknow. Counter affidavit be filed within two weeks.”

The order may be read here:

Related:

BJP government under Adityanath is torturing the people in UP: Sanjay Singh AAP
Are low numbers of Communal Riots in 2020 a mere deception?
Don’t need Miya Muslim vote: Himanta Biswa Sarma

The post SC grants protection to Sanjay Singh in hate speech cases appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Uttar Pradesh Government informed the Allahabad High Court on February 2 that it had decided to drop the proceedings against farmers with tractors who were earlier issued notices to furnish exorbitant personal bonds in the wake of farmers’ protests.

The court noted, “Today, Sri V.K. Shahi, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of U.P. has informed the Court that notices were issued to 162 persons for executing the bond of Rs.10 lacs and two sureties of the like amount out of which 43 persons have appeared in the matter and on the basis of fresh challan report, the proceeding against all the persons have been dropped, as there is no further apprehension to breach of peace or disturbance of public tranquillity.”

The Division Bench of Justices Ramesh Sinha and Rajeev Singh also noted that the Counsel for the State “could not justify” the acts of the Sub-Divisional Magistrates (SDM) of various divisions working under the District Magistrate, Sitapur for issuing notice to farmers for furnishing personal bonds.

The Bench took the matter into consideration and remarked that “the District Magistrate Sitapur and the SDMs working under him shall be cautious in passing orders in any proceedings of such a nature calling upon the persons to execute personal bond and sureties and their orders, act and conduct should not be such which reflects arbitrariness and against the principles of natural justice.”

On January 19, notices were issued under Section 111 of the Code of Criminal Procedure asking farmers to furnish personal bonds in the range of Rs 50,000 to Rs 10,00,000 (Rupees fifty thousand to ten lakh) and two sureties for the like amount on the basis of apprehension of breach of law and order amid protests.

Thereafter, the notice was challenged in the court and according to LiveLaw, the plea stated that the notices that have been issued by District administration of Sitapur to farmers were “causing them financial hardship and not allowing them to move freely from their dwelling place”.

The same Bench, on January 25, questioned the State Government over the reason behind such a notice. The Bench said, “Considering the averments made in the present writ petition and notices, which have been issued to the farmers, who are tractor owners, we deem it appropriate to call instructions from the State authorities as to under what circumstances such an exorbitant amount of personal bond and two sureties have been asked to furnish to them”.

Finally, the court decided to dispose of the matter yesterday (February 2) as the state counsel assured the Bench that he shall instruct the District Magistrate Sitapur-respondent No.2 “to be careful in future while any such proceedings are initiated so that no unnecessary harassment is caused to any person and further to instruct the SDMs working under him.”

The order may be read here:

Related:

Ensure safety of protesting farmers, stop propaganda against Sikhs: Plea in SC
Budget Session: How the Centre justified farms laws in Lok Sabha
Gov’t will not compensate families of farmers who died during protests: MHA

The post Bonds levied on UP farmers: Allahabad HC warns DM to be “cautious” appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A First Information Report (FIR) has been filed against three journalists of a local news outlet in Kanpur for reporting on the plight of school children made to attend an official government function on Sunday. Their report had claimed that children were left shivering in the cold, wearing only cotton shirts and knickers, while government officials and dignitaries were busy celebrating the state’s Foundation Day on Sunday. 

Attendees included Ajit Pal Singh (State Minister of Technology), Dinesh Chandra (District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat) and many other government officials and Members of Legislative Assembly (MLA), reported the Indian Express.

Tulsiram Pandey, Station House Officer of Akbarpur Police Station told media persons that the FIR was filed on Tuesday by Sunil Dutt, a Basic Shiksha Adhikari (BSA) against reporters Mohit, Amit and Yasin under section 505 (public mischief) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. The reporters had uploaded videos of the children on social media that went viral. But officials concerned claimed that the children had previously worn woolen clothes, but were made to take them off for exercise. 

The filing of the FIR against these journalists brings back memories of another incident where a reporter was targeted for exposing that children were just given rotis and salt for midday meals. The story was reported by Pawan Jaiswal in August 2019 and the images were from a school in Shiur in Mirzapur in UP. Jaiswal had filmed children of the school eating roti and salt. The video went viral on social media after the news agency ANI picked it up. In the damning video, children can be seen squatting on the floor, tearing off pieces of roti, dipping them in salt and eating them. The Block Development Officer had at that time filed a complaint against Jaiswal as well as a local village head, accusing them of attempting to defame the government.

Related:

Citizens in Support of Journalist Pawan Jaiswal
Journalism is a hazardous profession in Uttar Pradesh
Freedom of Press in UP: Journalists killed, attacked, arrested, not allowed to talk to lawyer
UP: Days after milk adulteration scandal, vermin found in Mid-Day Meal dal
Sonbhadra: 1L of milk given to 81 students as part of their mid-day meal!

The post FIR against journalists for reporting on “shivering” school children at a UP Gov’t event appeared first on SabrangIndia.