Listen to youth… forces need to have a lot of restraint, SC on plea over CJP’s July 20 march

The CJI added that when a protest commences with a peaceful march, and some kind of incident takes place, “forces also need to have a lot of restraint in order to ensure that the situation does not go out of hand”.

“Stray incidents here or there, we need to tread very carefully… so that the youngsters don’t indulge in violence. The better course is to counsel them, to pacify them. The best powerful source is listening. Listen to them why they are shouting…,” he said.

The bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, was hearing a writ petition filed by former Air Force official Maneesh Kumar Solanki.

Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Rizwan Ahmed said that it is understandable if the protests were about fixing accountability of the minister or police.

“Moot question is, 15 days have passed, where is the accountability of the so-called organisers?” he added.

Apparently referring to the CJP, he added, “Why I am saying so is because it is not a registered organisation.”

Ahmed said that the organisers of the march are still fanning the flames through provocative statements moving from channel to channel. “Fifteen days have passed… moving from channel to channel… still giving provocative statements, still not allowing the fire to be doused; they are still fanning it,” he added.

The counsel said the organisers are held responsible even if there is a religious congregation somewhere and there is some negligence, even if there is a fire in the pandal. He added, “In this case, if the government is on the backfoot, society cannot be on the backfoot, the law cannot be on the backfoot… A bad precedent cannot be set.”

Ahmed pointed out that there was a law and order problem in Rajasthan on Tuesday. “A young man has died. So, if the government is bending over backwards in a matter of National Capital, will the government set up a precedent for Rajasthan? There also, the government will bend backwards to accommodate students… Tomorrow in Lucknow, a degree college student… for some demand… starts stone pelting on buses; will the government in Uttar Pradesh also bend backwards?” he asked.

The counsel further said, “In a society, everybody is important. The fraternity of law is important, fraternity of farmers is important… fraternity of people saying reservation should not be there is important.”

Ahmed pointed out that the petition only sought community service for the wrongdoers and not any punitive measure. “Stone pelters cannot be just allowed to go scot-free without any consideration just because the government was caught on the wrong foot.”

“Today the government is there, tomorrow it won’t be there…This is a very dangerous precedent,” he added.

He said, “Three years back, the farmers were at Shambhu border… People (were) at Shaheen Bagh. Tomorrow, Generation Alpha, Beta, Gama, Delta will come. The people at the Shambhu border, tomorrow they will come to the Parliament with the tractors. Tomorrow, people from Shaheen Bagh will come to the Parliament with tractors…”.

Ahmed said the organisers of the July 20 March had flouted several conditions imposed by the police.

“Parliament is the temple of democracy. We have to see the motive and intention. If 500 people would have entered the Parliament. who knows they were not carrying a country-made gun? Who knows they were not carrying some country-made bomb? The Parliament security is not made to handle 500 people. It is a highly sophisticated weapon force; they would have opened fire. What would have happened?” he asked.

“They were not marching on a national highway. They were not marching on a railway line. They were marching to the temple of democracy. Everything should be accountable,” he added.

The court tagged the petition with other pleas on the student protests’ issue. “We will hear you again. Let’s also see what the view of the central government is. And we are open to hearing everyone… We are open to all kinds of suggestions, viewpoints,” the CJI said.