E-Paper
Supreme Court judge during Kanwar hearing: ‘Used to visit veg hotel run by a Muslim…'
A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti issued notices to Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Madhya Pradesh.
The Supreme Court on Monday put on hold the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand governments' order directing shopkeepers along the Kanwar Yatra route to display their names, saying food sellers and hawkers must not be forced to disclose the names but may be required to show the kind of food being served to Kanwariyas.
A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti issued notices to Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Madhya Pradesh.
"Until the returnable date, having regard to the discussion, we deem it appropriate to pass an interim order prohibiting the enforcement of the above directives. In other words, the food sellers... hawkers, etc. may be required to display the kind of food they are serving to Kanwariyas but they must not be forced to disclose the names," the bench said in its order.
Meanwhile, during the hearing, Justice Bhatti recalled that he would frequent a restaurant run by a Muslim in Kerala for vegetarian food because he maintained hygiene of international standards.
"I have my experience and knowledge when I was in Kerala. I may not state openly as I am a sitting judge of this court. Without disclosing the name of the city, there is a vegetarian hotel run by a Hindu. There is another vegetarian hotel run by a Muslim. As a judge of that state, I was going to the hotel run by a Muslim for vegetarian food. When it comes to food standards and safety, he was displaying everything. He had returned from Dubai. He maintained international standards of safety, cleanliness and hygiene. So it was my choice to go to that hotel," Justice Bhatti said.
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, who appeared for Trinamool Congress (TMC) Lok Sabha MP Mahua Moitra, remarked," You chose by menu card and not name."
The bench was hearing a clutch of petitions against the order.
The bench asked Singhvi if any formal order had been passed. He replied that a "camouflaged" order was passed that required the shop owners to display their names.
Senior advocate Chander Uday Singh, appearing for the Association for Protection of Civil Rights, said no law gave the police commissioner the power to issue such an order.
The bench later asked Singhvi to desist from exaggeration, saying these orders may have "safety and hygiene" dimensions as well.
The lawyer replied that people from different faiths had been helping Kanwariyas for ages.
Apart from the Opposition, the BJP-led government's order was opposed by its allies as well, including Rashtriya Lok Dal (RLD) and JD(U).
While the Opposition called the order divisive, BJP claimed the step had been taken to protect the religious sentiments and the law-and-order situation.
With inputs from PTI, ANI
