The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Uttar Pradesh government to take all precautionary measures and ensure that no hate speeches were delivered during the ‘Dharam Sansad,’ being organised between December 17 to 21 in Ghaziabad by controversial priest Yati Narasinghanand.
The Bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar further directed the state government to ensure that the Apex Court’s directions to prevent hate speeches were fully complied with,
The top court of the country passed the order, while refusing to entertain a contempt petition filed against the Uttar Pradesh administration and the state police for not taking steps to prevent the Dharam Sansad.
The Bench observed that it was not inclined to entertain the plea since the issues were coming from both sides. It further said that there were other equally serious matters and if the Court entertained this petition, it would be flooded with pleas on similar matters.
The mere fact that the Apex Court was not entertaining the petition did not mean there should be violations, said the Court, while directing the State of Uttar Pradesh to make a video of the event.
Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, assured the Court of complying with all its directions.
When Advocate Bhushan argued that the priest was on bail in many hate speech cases, the Bench granted him liberty to seek cancellation of Yati Narshighanand’s bail, in case there were violations.
When the top court of the country told Advocate Prashant Bhushan to approach the appropriate authorities for relief, he replied that representations had been given to the authorities, but no action had been taken on them.
The Bench then observed that the Supreme Court should not be the first court to be approached in such matters, and suggested Bhushan to move the High Court.
The contempt petition was filed by retired IAS officer Aruna Roy, retired IFS officers Ashok Kumar Sharma, Deb Mukarji & Navrekha Sharma, former member of the Planning Commission & NCW Chief Syeda Hameed, and social researcher & policy analyst Vijayan MJ.
The petitioners contended that the website and the advertisements for the ‘Dharam Sansad’ included hate speeches against the followers of Islam religion and threatened to incite violence against them.
As per the petitiorners, Yati Narsighanand had a history of making communal statements targeting the minority community.
In 2021, the ‘Dharam Sansad’ events held by Yati Narasinghanand had created controversy for communal comments. He was arrested in connection with hate speech cases and later released on bail. The Supreme Court had issued notice to him in a criminal contempt case over his remarks against the judiciary.
The post appeared first on .
The Bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar further directed the state government to ensure that the Apex Court’s directions to prevent hate speeches were fully complied with,
The top court of the country passed the order, while refusing to entertain a contempt petition filed against the Uttar Pradesh administration and the state police for not taking steps to prevent the Dharam Sansad.
The Bench observed that it was not inclined to entertain the plea since the issues were coming from both sides. It further said that there were other equally serious matters and if the Court entertained this petition, it would be flooded with pleas on similar matters.
The mere fact that the Apex Court was not entertaining the petition did not mean there should be violations, said the Court, while directing the State of Uttar Pradesh to make a video of the event.
Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, assured the Court of complying with all its directions.
When Advocate Bhushan argued that the priest was on bail in many hate speech cases, the Bench granted him liberty to seek cancellation of Yati Narshighanand’s bail, in case there were violations.
When the top court of the country told Advocate Prashant Bhushan to approach the appropriate authorities for relief, he replied that representations had been given to the authorities, but no action had been taken on them.
The Bench then observed that the Supreme Court should not be the first court to be approached in such matters, and suggested Bhushan to move the High Court.
The contempt petition was filed by retired IAS officer Aruna Roy, retired IFS officers Ashok Kumar Sharma, Deb Mukarji & Navrekha Sharma, former member of the Planning Commission & NCW Chief Syeda Hameed, and social researcher & policy analyst Vijayan MJ.
The petitioners contended that the website and the advertisements for the ‘Dharam Sansad’ included hate speeches against the followers of Islam religion and threatened to incite violence against them.
As per the petitiorners, Yati Narsighanand had a history of making communal statements targeting the minority community.
In 2021, the ‘Dharam Sansad’ events held by Yati Narasinghanand had created controversy for communal comments. He was arrested in connection with hate speech cases and later released on bail. The Supreme Court had issued notice to him in a criminal contempt case over his remarks against the judiciary.
The post appeared first on .