'Can't Question Govt's Political Wisdom': Allahabad HC On PIL Challenging Centre's 'Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas' Notification
The Allahabad High Court on Thursday disposed of former Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Amitabh Thakur's Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition challenging the Central government's recent notification declaring June 25, the day Emergency was imposed in the country in 1975, as 'Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas'.
A bench of Justice Sangeeta Chandra and Justice Shree Prakash Singh said that the Court cannot delve into political matters or question the government's political wisdom in issuing the notification.
"This Court, having heard the counsel for the petitioner at some length, is of the considered opinion that it is the lookout of the Government for declaration to be made with regard to the excesses caused by the proclamation of Emergency on 25.06.1975. The Court cannot enter into the political thicket and cannot question the political wisdom of the Government in issuing such a notification, as has been challenged in this writ petition," the Court observed in its order made public today.
In his PIL plea, Thakur argued that the government's impugned notification was improper and unintended and would send an adverse message to the people at large regarding the Constitution of India.
Before the Court, Advocates Nutan Thakur and Deepak Kumar, appearing for Thakur, argued that the use of the words 'Samvidhan Hatya Diwas' reiterates the violence against people's rights during the proclamation of Emergency, but it could not be said that the Constitution itself was killed.
It was submitted that if the Government felt that the Constitution was 'killed', democracy would not have been able to be revived when the people of India threw out the Government of the day in General Elections held thereafter.
It was also argued that instead of using the words in question, the Central Government could have used more appropriate language and should have considered positive terminology.
It was contended that the Union Government could have used the words "Samvidhan Raksha Diwas" as the intent of the Gazette Notification was only to remind the people of India of the excesses committed by the Government of the day by proclamation of Emergency on 25.06.1975.
At the outset, the counsel for the respondents raised a preliminary objection, stating that the petitioner failed to disclose complete credentials to the Court.
It was submitted that while the petitioner identified himself as a social and political activist with a B.Tech from IIT Kanpur, a degree in Human Resource Management from IIM Lucknow, former IPS officer in the UP Cadre, and current National President of the registered political party Azad Adhikar Sena, as well as an author of several books, he did not disclose that he is accused of instigating a rape victim's suicide outside the Supreme Court premises.
In response, the counsels appearing for the petitioner submitted that although Rule 3A had been added to Chapter 22 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952, there is no requirement to state on affidavit if a petitioner is an accused in a criminal case.
Considering the submissions of both parties, the Court refused to grant any effective remedy and disposed of the plea by observing that it couldn't question the Union Government's political wisdom.
Case title - Amitabh Thakur vs. Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Home Affairs , India Govt. New Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 456
Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 456