Premium

PILs on gau raksha: SC wants Centre, states to respond

“We will examine it. Let us take the response of others,” said a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy as it sought responses from the Centre and six state governments.

indus treaty, indus water treaty, supreme court, urgent hearing, indus hearing, india pakistan indus water treaty, water treaty, indus water pil, sc refuses indus treaty, uri, uri attack, kashmir attack, indian express news, india news

Senior advocate Sanjay Hegde told the court that Mohanbhai was a victim of cow vigilantism, and that the PILs had to be filed owing to the inaction of the state governments in checking unlawful assaults.

Taking up the issue of cow vigilantism in the country, the Supreme Court Friday said it is willing to examine state legislation and pertinent rules that may embolden gau rakshaks (cow vigilantes) to unleash violence in the name of cow protection without worrying about their prosecution.

“We will examine it. Let us take the response of others,” said a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy as it sought responses from the Centre and six state governments on the issue of cow protection groups and the validity of legal provisions that might encourage vigilantes to take the law in their hands.

The bench said that the batch of three petitions, which urged the apex court to take notice of the spurt in violent incidents reportedly involving gau rakshaks, shall be served upon the counsel for the central government as well as states that would appoint lawyers to respond to the contentions.

Watch Video: What’s making news

The PILs filed by Tehseen Poonawalla, Mohanbhai Bedva and Martin C Machwan sought directions to various state governments as well as the Centre “to take immediate and appropriate actions against the vigilantes, who in the garb of Gau Rakshak Dals (cow protection groups) had been spreading violence and committing atrocities against Dalits and minorities in the name of protection of cow and other bovine species.”

Representing the petitioners, senior advocate Sanjay Hegde told the court that Mohanbhai was a victim of cow vigilantism, and that the PILs had to be filed owing to the inaction of the state governments in checking unlawful assaults.

Hegde added that at least six states — Gujarat, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Rajasthan and Jharkhand — had pertinent provisions in laws related to prevention of cruelty to animals that provided some immunity to gau rakshaks from their prosecution under the criminal law.

“The relevant law in Gujarat provides that no suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall be instituted against any person for anything which is done in good faith or intended to be done under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act or the rules made thereunder. Similar laws have been framed by other states, too. Now, gau rakshaks claim immunity citing their good faith and state government have gone ahead issuing identification cards to such vigilantes,” contended Hegde.

Adducing news reports from across the country where people had been attacked by gau rakshaks, the petitioners pleaded that such groups ought to be banned in the interest of social harmony, public morality and law and order in the country, and for violating the fundamental rights of others. It further complained that in most cases, police and other law enforcement agencies are either complicit in such illegal actions or have merely been mute spectators.

First uploaded on: 22-10-2016 at 00:35 IST

Prajwal Revanna sex abuse case: Everyone knows about video, we can’t go back to village

CitiesUpdated: May 6, 2024 07:33 IST

A woman who was allegedly abducted to prevent her from approaching the SIT against a JD(S) legislator's son in a sexual assault case has caused public scrutiny and fear for her family. The victim's videos have circulated, causing trauma and fear of rejection for her son-in-law and their village. The family is now under SIT protection.

View all shorts

Live Blog