SC on protests: Law enforcement agencies must show restraint
The Supreme Court on Wednesday underscored the need for law enforcement agencies to exercise restraint during protests and said youngsters must be pacified, even if some “misguided elements” indulge in stone-pelting, as it agreed to hear a plea seeking action against organisers of the July 20 ‘Sansad Chalo’ march for allegedly inciting violence.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana tagged the plea, filed by a retired Air Force officer, with a similar petition. Advocate Rizwan Ahmed, appearing for petitioner Maneesh Kumar Solanki, said, “Fifteen days have passed... What about the accountability of the organisers? They are going from channel to channel giving provocative statements and refusing to douse the fire”.
Referring to a recent law and order incident in Rajasthan, the lawyer argued that Governments should not “bend backwards” to accommodate protesters.
“One young man has died. If the Government bends backwards in a matter concerning the national capital, will it not set a precedent in Rajasthan? There also the Government will bend backwards to accommodate students. Tomorrow, if degree college students in Lucknow have some demand and start pelting stones at buses, will the Government in Uttar Pradesh also bend backwards?” he submitted.
Responding to his submission, the CJI said even if some “misguided elements” indulge in stone-pelting, youngsters are required to be pacified and counselled.
“They need advice and counselling. Any aggressive approach from the side of the mighty State may socially aggravate the situation and precipitate further violence. That needs to be avoided,” the CJI said. The lawyer contended that those involved in stone-pelting should not be allowed to go scot-free without any consideration merely because the Government was on the “wrong foot”.
“This is a very dangerous precedent. Three years back, the farmers were at the Singhu border. Tomorrow, Generation Alpha, Beta, Delta will come,” he said.
The lawyer further argued that Parliament was the “temple of democracy” and said if 500 people had entered the complex, “who knows whether they were carrying a country-made gun?”
“What if they had opened fire? They were not marching on a national highway. They were not marching on a railway line. They were marching towards the temple of democracy. Everyone must be held accountable,” he said.
The CJI observed that the focus should be on ensuring peaceful protests while exercising restraint if an incident occurs.
“What is important is to promote a peaceful march. If some incident takes place, the police also need to exercise a great deal of restraint to ensure that the situation does not go out of hand. Wherever such incidents take place, we need to deal with them very carefully,” he said.
“We need to tread carefully, so that these youngsters do not indulge in violence. The better course is to counsel them and pacify them. The most powerful tool is listening. Listen to them and understand why they are shouting.
“But let us leave it to the wisdom of the law-enforcement agencies. They know better than you, and they know better than us, how to deal with this kind of situation,” the CJI said.
The plea also sought directions to identify those who allegedly used derogatory language against police and security personnel and require them to perform community service.
