news details |
|
|
| Beef ban: HC puts ball in govt's court, disposes off petitions | | | Early Times Report
Srinagar, Oct 16: observing that legislation which creates wedge between different sections of society may not be valid, a full high court bench of Justice Muzaffar Hussain Attar, Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice Tashi Rabstan today vacated its division bench's September 8 order, directing strict enforcement of ban on slaughter of bovines and beef sale.
Disposing of the conflicting petitions on bovine slaughter, the bench also directed government to take a decision on pleas raised in both the petitions and take a decision "acceptable legally and constitutionally."
"Certain existing laws affect the guaranteed constitutional rights of a large section of society. Some laws protect only rights of one section of society, whereas, they offend the constitutional and legal rights of other section of society," the court observed, adding, that when some laws violate the guaranteed constitutional right of large a section of society, or have become dead laws, or have not been consciously enforced by the executive wing of state for a considerable period of time, they would call for fresh look and consideration by the Executive and Legislative Wing of State.
"Remaining of such laws on the statute book would be inconsequential and are incapable of enforcement, having assumed the character of fossils. Some laws or provisions of laws, with the passage of time, lose their sheen and are dead laws rendered incapable of enforcement," said the bench in a jam-packed court.
In the 25-page verdict, the bench also underlined importance of respecting religious sentiments by various communities.
"The Hindus follow a set of principles, norms and rules. Similarly Jews, Christians, Budhists etc follow some set of principles, norms and rules. Likewise a Muslim follows the Quaranic injunctions and Hadith," the court observed, adding, a religion is a prescription which guarantees peace and order in the society. "Religion delineates path of peace, truth, piousness and righteousness. Religion guarantees and protects the rights of citizens, persons and individuals. It is basic human duty of each community to respect the sentiments of other community," the court said, emphasising that the respect shown to the religious sentiments of each other in a pluristic society "like ours is hallmark of our ancient history."
"All the rights of these people, more particularly religious rights, are protected by constitution," the bench said and referred to Articles 14, 21 and 25 which provides for equality before law, guarantee protection and right to practice, follow and preach one's religion to all citizens. "The expression Indianism sufficiently clarified in the judgement (Sanjay Tickoo) that India is pluralistic state. Its citizens are Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians etc. All the rights, which include religious rights of all these citizens belonging to different religious denominations, are protected and guaranteed by Constitution of India," the court said.
The bench also disposed both petitions-PIL filed by a lawyer Parimoksh Seth before Jammu wing in 2014 for strict implementation of the law on bovines and the petition by retired Professor S.M.Afzal Qadri for abrogation of legislation.
In the PIL, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of direction to put in place the strong mechanism for prevention of cow slaughtering in J&K by directing all the concerned authorities to initiate serious punitive actions against all those persons who are involved in such criminal activities. It is further prayed that by issuance direction, respondents be directed to disclose to the court the action initiated against the persons who are involved in commission of offence of slaughtering or killing of cow or like animals or any bovine animal and ensure that such persons do not escape punishments and to file appropriate proceedings against all those offenders before the competent criminal courts.
"In this petition, which has been filed in the public interest by a learned advocate, at para 3, it is pleaded that in the month of July 2014 the newspapers of the State have reported two incidents of cow slaughtering. ….The petitioner has nowhere pleaded in the writ petition that he has verified the allegations reported in the press or that he has verified the same from the editors of the concerned newspapers," the court said and observed that the petition cannot be said to have been filed in public interest, in as much as, the petitioner has failed to comply with part III of writ proceeding rules of 1997 having not disclosed any incident which has come to his knowledge. In OWP No.1648/2015 filed by professor Qadri, the petitioner has challenged the vires of Section 298-A, 298-B, 298-C and 298-D of RPC.
The full bench vacated an order by its division bench 08 September 2015 which impressed upon the police to strictly enforce the laws banning slaughter of bovines and sale of their flesh.
"In view of the aforesaid discussion, both the petitions are disposed of along with connected MPs and orders passed from time to time in these petitions, including order dated 08.09.2015, are vacated," the court said, adding , "The petitions are disposed of in the following manner: The State of Jammu and Kashmir through Chief Secretary to consider the issues raised in these petitions in the light of observations made in this order and take appropriate steps in accordance with law."
The court also disposed of applications by Kashmir High Court Bar Association and another by one Ashoo Mongia, National President Rashtriya Goraksha Sena for participating in the proceedings of the case, observing that there was no need to consider them. No one appeared for PIL petitioner as well as for Mongia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
