‘Can’t micromanage from Delhi’: Supreme Court disposes of PIL against mob lynching, cow vigilantism

The bench said its directions in the Tehseen Poonawalla case are binding on all authorities in view of Article 141 of the Constitution and they are bound to follow it.

The apex court said, “If there is non-compliance with Tehseen Poonawalla, aggrieved person has remedy in law. Sitting in Delhi, we can’t monitor incidents in different areas in different states of the country. Such micromanagement would not be feasible. If any other person is aggrieved, they can approach (concerned authority) in accordance with law.”

The plea also prayed that a uniform minimum amount be paid to the victims as compensation for injuries, etc. On this, the bench said the adequate compensation would differ from case to case. “No uniform direction can be issued to authorities” it said, adding that doing so “would be taking away discretion for determining compensation.”

The court said it finds that a petition “seeking such omnibus reliefs would neither be in the interest of victims.”

The petitioner’s counsel told the bench that various states have issued notifications giving private persons power for cow protection. This was the source of all problems, he said, adding the state machinery acts brazenly when such incidents occur and cases are registered against victims.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said the notifications can be challenged before high courts.

The bench also said it cannot decide the validity of the various state enactments in one go and that it will be appropriate for the aggrieved to approach the jurisdictional high court to challenge the constitutional validity of the notifications.