No ‘avengeful’ recovery: Top court tells UP

The Supreme Court on Friday sought response of the UP government on recovering losses caused by damage to public properties during anti-CAA agitations in the state.

A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and K M Joseph issued notice to the state government and directed it to file its response within four weeks.

The top court was hearing a plea which alleged that notices have been sent in Uttar Pradesh in an "arbitrary manner".

One such notice was sent against a person, who had died six years ago at the age of 94, and also to two others who are aged above 90.

Advocate Parwaiz Arif Titu, a petitioner in the case, has sought stay on these notices claiming they have been sent to persons......

...... who have not been booked under any penal provisionsand no details of FIR or any criminal offences have been made out against them.

The plea, filed through advocate Nilofar Khan, has said that notices were based on an Allahabad High Court verdict delivered in 2010....

.....which "is in violation of the guidelines" passed by the top court in a 2009 judgment which was later re-affirmed in a 2018 verdict.

"The judicial oversight/judicial security is a sort of safety mechanism against arbitrary action.

This means that there is every chance that the ruling party in the state could go after its political opponents or others oppose to it to settle scores," it has said.

It has also sought a direction to the Uttar Pradesh government to follow the procedure as per the 2009 and 2018 guidelines of the apex court.

The plea has sought setting up of an independent judicial inquiry to probe into the incidents in Uttar Pradesh during protests against CAA.

The plea has claimed that the BJP-led Yogi Adityanath government in UP is "moving ahead on the chief minister's promise of avenging loss to public property" .....

.....by seizing assets of protestors in order to "take revenge for political reasons from one community who is in minority".

It further alleged that around 925 persons, who have been arrested so far, may not get bail easily.....

.... till they pay up for the losses as they have to be given "conditional bail" only after they deposit the amount.

The plea, while giving details of instances in the state during the anti-CAA protests, claimed there is "no rule of law" in Uttar Pradesh....

....  there is "complete violation" of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution in order to crack down the protests against CAA and NRC.