A PIL had been filed in the Supreme Court praying that an order be passed by the Court for registration of FIRs against Delhi Police and CAPF ( Central Armed Police Force ) officials for use of excessive force on student protestors gathered at Jantar Mantar, Delhi.
Before the Supreme Court, the CJP claimed that the police made an uncalled for, unjustifiable, and unwarranted attack on the protestors, whereas the police claimed that the protestors first pelted the police with stones and attacked them in other ways, and the police action was only a reaction.
Since there were conflicting versions, the Supreme Court rightly ordered an independent investigation.
However, Saurav Das, a CJP leader has stated that all FIRs and cases against the protestors must be withdrawn, in view of the government’s assurances, and has threatened restarting the CJP agitation, which had been called off.
What Saurav Das does not understand is that a Court has to enforce the law, not government assurances. A government assurance is not a statute which a Court must follow and enforce.
Saurav Das said that the CJP would not accept the Court order. In other words, he has impliedly said that the CJP would only accept a Court order which is favourable to it. Is this approach tenable ?
If this is accepted, every party who loses a case can say it will not accept the Court order, and start giving threats to get it rescinded.
At the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, submitted that criminals had infiltrated the protests and were responsible for the violence against police personnel, which resulted in injuries to 200 policemen.
Hence, taking a balanced view, while directing that for the time being no coercive action be taken against the protestors, the Court ordered an independent investigation, taaki doodh ka doodh aur paani ki paani ho jaaye. What serious objection can be taken to this order ?
It seems that the CJP leaders believe they are above the law, and can dictate Courts to pass orders which they want
