Author-Livya P. Lalu, [Delhi Metropolitan Education, Noida]
The Supreme Court of India comprising in the bench Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice S. K. Kaul on October 23, 2018 rejected a PIL seeking an instruction that the politicians, who were purportedly behind the enormous turmoil over the country filled by the March 20, 2018 judgment of the Supreme Court of India in ‘Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra’ weakening the SC/ST Act of 1989 for “the losses and damage to public property so sustained.” According to SC/ST Act ‘The Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted to prevent atrocities against Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes. The Act is popularly known as the SC/ST Act, POA, the Prevention of Atrocities Act, or simply the Atrocities Act.’
“Who are you?” the Chief Justice of India tired to know the petitioner Bijon Kumar Misha’s certifications from his counsel. When the Advocate said that the petitioner was a social worker working for the society, Chief Justice Gogoi communicated shock at the madness of the supplication for a bearing to promptly limit the concerned politicians from participating in the procedures of the assembly and to remain their compensation. “What social work?” There was some rioting over some Supreme Court verdict and you want us to say that politicians must not attend the Parliament or the (Legislative) Assembly and that they must not be paid till the CBI inquiry is over? “You want them to account for and compensate for the losses and the damages to property?” Did they take part in the rioting? What are these prayers? “What has the Supreme Court come to?” “You want us to issue guidelines to the politicians regarding their criticism of the judiciary on loaded topics of public importance? What are these topics according to social worker Bijon Kumar Mishra?” said the Chief Justice rhetorically. Indeed, even as the Counsel squeezed that 9 people were executed in the challenges and that no move was made against the concerned politicians, the Chief Justice continued to expel the appeal, recording that notwithstanding accepting that the PIL is bonafide, having respect to its inclination and the conditions prompting it, the court is slanted to take a view that the issue does not merit consideration.
We, as a citizen of India, ought to dependably keep one thing in our brain and heart that no individuals or network ought to be today offended or looked downward on, and no one’s sentiments ought to be harmed, the Supreme Court. “Dalit groups had organized protests across the country on April 2 against the alleged dilution of the Act through the March 20 verdict of the Supreme Court. The protests had turned violent at several places which left several people dead” said an official.
