E-Paper
Haridwar Dharam Sansad hate speeches: SC seeks status report on probe
The court also issued a notice to Himachal Pradesh, where a similar event is planned on Sunday in Una
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed Uttarakhand to file a status report by next week on the progress of the probe into hate speeches at a Dharam Sansad in Haridwar in December even as it issued a notice to Himachal Pradesh, where a similar event is planned on Sunday. Open calls for violence against minority communities were made at the Haridwar event.
The court passed the order in response to former Patna high court judge Anjana Prakash and journalist Qurban Ali’s plea for action against the hate speeches and a direction to stop similar events. It issued a notice on January 12 but the Uttarakhand government sought time to file a response.
The court is expected to take up the matter again on April 22.
Deputy advocate general Jatinder Kumar Sethi, who appeared for Uttarakhand, said an investigation into three of the four cases filed is over and charge sheets have been filed. “There was some communication gap due to which we could not file our response. We are seeking some time.”
A bench of justices AM Khanwilkar and AS Oka directed the listing of the matter next Friday. “...Uttarakhand shall file a status report by the next date.”
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for the petitioners, informed the court that a Dharam Sansad was scheduled at Una in Himachal Pradesh from April 17-19.
The petitioners earlier moved an application to add Himachal Pradesh as a party to their plea and sought directions for ensuring there is no repeat of the speeches.
The court allowed the petitioners to make appropriate intimations about the event to Una’s police superintendent and district magistrate. The petitioners this week moved a representation to the magistrate informing him about the pending proceedings in the court.
The petitioners said representatives of over 100 Hindu organisations and religious leaders from across India were expected to take part in the event. They added the participants include Yati Narsimhanand, who is facing probes for his hate speeches in Haridwar and Delhi.
The petitioners cited transcripts of speeches and said open calls were given for organised violence against Muslims and for their economic, and social boycott for ethnic cleansing. They added despite their representations, a Dharam Sansad was held in Prayagraj on January 29, where calls were made for Hindus to take up arms and prepare for armed resistance against Muslims.
The petitioners said subsequently a “Hindu Mahapanchayat” was organised in Delhi on April 3, where hate speeches were made and several journalists covering the event were assaulted. They called the court’s intervention necessary for stemming a growing tide of communalism and to put in place mechanisms for timely preventive action against persons wantonly making provocative speeches.
The petitioner said the speeches incite violence and promote enmity between groups on the grounds of religion. They added the speeches are prejudicial to national integration and induce the public to commit offences against public tranquillity, which are punishable offences.
