Kerala High Court
Ajimon Gangadharan @ Ajith vs State Of Kerala on 5 July, 2012
Author: A.M.Shaffique
Bench: A.M.Shaffique
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. MANJULA CHELLUR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/16TH AGRAHAYANA 1934
WP(C).No. 17269 of 2012 (S)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
AJIMON GANGADHARAN @ AJITH, AGED 42 YEARS
'SHIVA SMARANA' PUTHEN VEEDU, MULAVUKADU P.O.
ERNAKULAM - 682504.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.R.JAGADEESH
SRI.V.A.VINOD
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
2. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
3. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
4. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
R1-4 BY ADV. STATE ATTORNEY SRI.P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
07-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 17269 of 2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF PAPER REPORT APPEARED IN TIMES OF INDIA
DAILY DATED 5/7/2012.
EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 10/12/2011 AND ITS
ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.101273/G3/11/HOME DATED
10/2/2012 AND ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
/TRUE COPY/
PS TO JUDGE
MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J
&
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.
----------------------------------------------
W.P(C).No. 17269 of 2012
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of December, 2012
JUDGMENT
Manjula Chellur, C.J.
This Writ Petition is filed seeking following reliefs:
"I) To declare that the effigy burning and mock funerals of living persons as illegal and crime against humanity.
ii) To writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the respondents to take effective steps to ban the effigy burning.
iii) To issue any other writ or order that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. According to the petitioner, the uncivilised way of burning effigy and creating mock funerals is inhuman and barbaric. In spite of various representations being given to the respondents, no serious steps were taken to curb such barbaric activities. He also refers to instances where several high profile people were involved in such incidents, including Ministers, politicians and Judges. Therefore, he has approached this Court by way of Public Interest Litigation to have necessary law in that respect. WP(C).17269/12 2
3. The learned State Attorney took notice for the State and has filed a statement of objection having accepted that the effigy burning is a common phenomena used by protesters in protest march conducted by various organisations. Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the statements read as under:
"6. It is submitted that the Government are also considering to impose reasonable restrictions to protest involving burning effigies. In a democracy, Government cannot act unilaterally and a consensus have to be evolved as to how to show protest which vary from issue to issue. Having considered the rise in violence during protests which result in damage to public as well as private property, Government are preparing a bill based on the suggestions put forth by Justice K.T.Thomas Committee and Fali S Nariman Committee before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in W.P.(Crl)No.77/2007 i.e in Re: Distribution of Public & Private Properties Vs. State of AP & others. Any damage caused by burning effigy also can be handled within the provisions of this Act, when enacted. As of now the Government do not wish to impose a blanket ban which will boomerang and will invite protests from various organizations and political parties. Since it is a policy matter gradually, through process of consensus and awareness, the Government will consider bringing in effective measures, if necessary to ban effigy burning.
7. It is submitted that as stated above the Government are seriously considering effective measures to restrict or even ban destruction of public as well as private property and also can bring effigy burning within its purview. In the meanwhile in this WP(C).17269/12 3 aspect as a preliminary step before enactment recently State Police Chief on 03.11.2012 vide Circular No.32/2012 has given certain guidelines to effectuate the modalities for preventive action as soon as demonstration is organized. True copy of the above Circular is produced herewith and marked as Annexure R2(a)."
4. Steps already taken by the State are not only to create awareness, but also preventive action in this regard. Paragraphs 6 and 7 clearly indicate the anxiety shown by the State in this regard. Having regard to the fact that there is serious thought to curb such barbaric activities by way of formation of committees and circulars, we are of the opinion, as there is action in the right direction, we need not interfere in the matter. The respondent authorities must show all endeavour to see that their intention shown in the objection statement is implemented in practice.
With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE vgs06.12