Wednesday, May 22, 2024
HomeOpinionsJustice denied: Has court got any right of Moral Policing?

Justice denied: Has court got any right of Moral Policing?

Also Read

Supreme Court of India is facing a backlash after it rejected Nupur Sharma’s plea to club all the FIR’s registered against her in different parts of the country for allegedly insulting Islamic sentiments.

While hearing this plea with preoccupied bias Hon’ble Justice Suryakant made some remarks i.e The petitioner (Nupur Sharma) should apologize to whole country for her remarks and the petitioner (Nupur Sharma) is solely responsible for incidents happening in India (hinting towards violence in different parts of the country being carried out by Islamists apparently getting funded by Islamic countries for creating unrest in India society in the name of prophet and the incidents of beheadings carried by Muslim terrorists in Rajasthan’s Udaipur and Maharashtra’s Amravati.)

The whole contention revolves around the issue of legality and credibility of these observations. These observations are stuffed with gross illegality and here are some reasons for it:-

Reason 1. No court in the country has got any right of Moral Policing. Courts can only provide appropriate remedies and punishments mentioned in different statues.

Reason 2. The judgment and observations were given without properly hearing the petitioner thereby in violation of principle of Natural Justice(Audi Alteram Partem i.e hear the other party)

Reason 3. It is a basic principle of law that no party to the case must be looked at with biased lenses but in this case Hon’bles are clearly biased.

Reason 4. Supreme Court is the court of record and the Ratio decidendi have a binding effect on lower courts. Though obiter dicta is not binding but it have all the might to decide the course of judgments by lower courts.

Reason 5. These observations, denial of clubbing FIR’s and unnecessarily harsh attitude of court without going through proper legal proceedings (examination of FIR’s, calling for Police reports and investgating agencies, examination of witness, aggravating and mitigating circumstances)will create a prejudicial atmosphere against Nupur Sharma and now whichever court she will approach, there are higher chances of her case getting negatively and illegally affected.

Reason 6. In the cases where there are multiple FIR’s filed against a person in the same matter, clubbing is very usual remedy which is provided by Supreme Court in complete range of cases and in these type of cases where FIR’s have been filed in different states no Highcourt have a suitable remedy so Supreme Court is the only place left where the petitioner can approach. Forcing such petitioner (here one thing that needs to be kept in mind is that she hasn’t committed any serious/heinous offence under IPC) to withdraw her plea is a black day for judiciary.

Reason 7. Criminal Jurisprudence in India is based on the principle that “charges against the person must be proved beyond reasonable doubt” and if there is an iota of doubt is left the accused must be acquitted. In this case no legal proceeding was followed and a biased point of view holding Nupur Sharma guilty was projected by Hon’bles. It is not only inhumane but also a gross illegality because in this case not only an iota but whole facts and circumstances are doubtful.

Reason 8. It is a foundational principle of criminal jurisprudence that no person shall ne condemned unheard but Hon’bles tore apart this principle apart.

Is Nupur Sharma really liable?

Well this question must be decided on merits after thorough analysis of all the facts and circumstances. What she said is a factually correct thing and no statute in the world punishes a person for speaking out truth. There is no locus standi in this case because what Nupur has said is reiterated in multiple Islamic texts and Hadiths. The point that she was provoked by another muslim panelist as he was continuously hurling scathing remarks on Hindu deity Lord Shiva is also a mitigating circumstance if she will get an unbiased hearing.

If we talk about other incidents like violence in different states by Muslims and beheading of innocent Hindus i.e Kanhaiyalal in Udaipur and Umesh Kolhe in Amravati by Muslim terrorists, these are separate incidents which are being carried out by Islamists to threaten Hindu population. These incidents have nothing to do with the statement of Nupur Sharma as alleged by Hon’bles. Different investigating agencies have found that these muslim terrorists were getting financial and logistic support by various terrorist organizations and Islamic countries whose ultimate aim is to create instability in Indian society and the hidden motive of Ghazwa-I-Hind and making India Dar-al-Islam.

While holding Nupur Sharma solely responsible for these Islamic terrorist attacks Hon’bles forgot hate speeches given by thousand of Muslims leaders, clerics and common people flaunting their hatred by slogans like “Gustakh-i-Nabi ki ek he saza, sar tan se juda, sir tan se juda” and the effect of these slogans were recent majhabi beheadings of innocent Hindus.

Furthermore what if Hindus start reacting as Muslims are doing? There are thousands of videos, blogs, posts floating on social media carrying insulting remarks for Hindu deities and Hindu faith. Will courts have the same observations in those cases also? Though courts in India have always had an inherent bias against Hindus (e.g Sabarimala case, Kashmiri Hindu genocide, love jihad, illegal-inhuman conversions, political violence against Hindus in Kerala and West-Bengal, lynchings of Hindus all over the country) but still Hindus have somehow managed to keep its trust in judiciary and legal system affixed.

But these types of incidents of intentionally denying justice to Hindus who are already reeling under the state sponsored discrimination on the basis of religion will work as watershed moment and once Hindus lost faith in legal system situations would be worse. These observations provides moral support to Islamic terrorists by curtaining their culpability and imposing it on innocent Nupur Sharma and this might be a dangerous precedent.

It is a request to Judicial authorities with folded hands that they must perform their functions with utmost integrity and must come out of Elite-Lutyen Hangover and analyse the situation objectively and with sane and practical mindset.

  Support Us  

OpIndia is not rich like the mainstream media. Even a small contribution by you will help us keep running. Consider making a voluntary payment.

Trending now

- Advertisement -

Latest News

Recently Popular