CAA Protest in UP: The Supreme Court has discussed the decision of the Uttar Pradesh government in the matter of placing photo hoardings and posters of the accused of damaging government and other properties during violence in Lucknow in protest against the Citizenship Amendment Act.
CAA Protest in UP: UP government not getting relief from Supreme Court on recovery posters, refuses to interfere in High Court verdict
The Uttar Pradesh government had challenged the Allahabad High Court’s order to remove hoardings and posters carrying photographs of the accused who sabotaged during the violence in Lucknow.
The left bench of Justice UU Lalit and Anirudh Bose heard the appeal of the Uttar Pradesh government on Thursday.
During the anti-CAA protests, the Supreme Court sent a three-judge bench to consider posters in Lucknow and other cities for property damage.
At present, the High Court order is not barred. In the Supreme Court, the left bench of Justice Umesh Uday Lalit and Justice Anirudh Bose was directed to refer the matter to the larger bench.
The Supreme Court has declined to linger the Allahabad High Court decision. After this, the Uttar Pradesh government will now have to remove all the posters by March 16.
No relief to Uttar Pradesh government
These posters were ordered to be removed by the Allahabad High Court, which was challenged by the Yogi Adityanath government in the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has refused to linger the High Court order and referred the matter to a larger bench. The left bench of Supreme Court Justice Umesh Uday Lalit and Justice Anirudh Bose was directed to refer the matter to the higher bench.
Justice Lalit said that the Chief Justice would look into the matter. In this case, all characters who have names in hoardings should be allowed to file a case in the Supreme Court.
Earlier, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that 95 people were initially identified. Their pictures were put on hoardings.
Of these, 57 are also accused of the charge. The accused now challenged the posters in the High Court indicating the right to privacy, but the 1994 judgment of the Supreme Court in the Puttaswamy case has also affirmed many aspects of the right to privacy.
On this, Justice Lalit said that if people of a particular organization appear in front of riots or destruction of public property, then the action is a separate issue, but what is the logic behind putting a picture of a common man.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, “We put up these hoardings after giving warnings and information.” On this, Justice Anirudh Bose stated that here is the difference between the people and the government.
Many times, people break the law and do something, but the government is obstructed to run and work according to the law. During this, Justice Lalit said that at present, no system is supporting you. If there is a law, then tell me.
Removing the hoarding is not a big deal, but the subject is significant.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that the Supreme Court of Britain has also granted privacy and it does not matter if an issue or activity is directly related to the public or comes in the public record.
Removing the hoarding is not a big deal, but the subject is significant. Any person can do anything in private life but cannot be approved in public.
Tushar Mehta said that after issuing notice to the accused, we took a final decision on not getting any response.
57 people are involved in this case, from which recovery should be made. We gave a 30-day extension for payment.
Singhvi said that the UP government ignored some basic rules. If we just keep on showing without thinking, then the same will happen in the case of a minor rapist? There is an underlying problem.
The UP government ignored a decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of destroying public property. Here, the government made the people in the crowd guilty, the head court bench asked the Uttar Pradesh government, under which law they got the right to post the accused.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that it had been claimed that many protesters in the state are doing damage to public property in the open. The media made their video. Everyone watched the video. In such a situation, we cannot claim it.
In a petition challenging the UP government’s order of Allahabad High Court, SG Tushar Mehta said that a man waves a gun during protests and is allegedly involved in violence.
Such a person cannot claim the right to privacy. The government had challenged the Allahabad High Court’s decision in the Supreme Court in Lucknow to put up posters of protesters against the Citizenship Amendment Act.
Taking automatic knowledge of the case, the Allahabad High Court ordered the government to remove the posters of the protesters. During the protest against CAA, the fact of posting of banners of destruction in Lucknow reached the Supreme Court.
For more updates stay tuned on world-wire.com
Subscribe to Email Updates :