Category Archives: Legal News

SC PASSES INTERIM ORDER ALLOWING WOMEN TO APPEAR FOR NDA EXAM, SLAMS ‘GENDER DISCRIMINATION’

SC Passes Interim Order Allowing Women to Appear for NDA Exam, Slams 'Gender Discrimination'

While issuing the order, the court criticised the Army for not permitting women to take part in the NDA exam.

The present public interest petition raises the issue of violation of Articles 14, 15, 16 and 19 of the Constitution of India by denying the opportunity to eligible and willing female candidates to join the National Defence Academy.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday passed an interim order to allow women to take the admission exam to National Defence Academy (NDA), even as the Centre said women cannot claim violation of any fundamental right for being denied entry as the male cadets trained there do not have any automatic advantage in future career advancement prospects over the women whose only route to enter the Army is by recruitment through short service commission.

The result would be subject to final adjudication of the petitions. A division bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy passed the interim order in a writ petition filed by Kush Kalra seeking permission for women candidates to appear for the NDA exam.

While issuing the order, the court criticised the Army for not permitting women to take part in the NDA exam. When the Army’s counsel submitted that it is a policy decision, the top court said that the said policy decision was based on “gender discrimination”.

The present public interest petition raises the issue of violation of Articles 14, 15, 16 and 19 of the Constitution of India by denying the opportunity to eligible and willing female candidates to join the National Defence Academy and afford them a chance to enrol, train and develop themselves in the National Defence Academy into future leaders of the Indian Armed Forces.

For more Legal Updates; Join Team Attorneylex’s WhatsApp group to get notified immediately. Also check us out on Instagram and Twitter

Delhi Court issues notice to Honey Singh in domestic violence complaint filed by his wife

A Delhi court has issued notice to Bollywood singer and actor Honey Singh in a domestic violence complaint filed by his wife (applicant).

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Tis Hazari court Tania Singh also passed interim orders in favour of the applicant-wife restraining Singh from disposing jointly owned property, her Stridhan etc.

The applicant submitted that she is living in fear as she had been subjected to mental, physical, emotional, sexual, and economic violence by Singh and his family.

The applicant is constantly living under fear as the respondents have threatened her of physical harm, ” the plea under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 said.

Further, the Court was informed that the respondents were in possession of the applicant’s Stridhan and were likely to misappropriate the entire amount.

It was alleged that the respondents were brash and violent towards the applicant and it was stated that Singh had a history of criminal intimidation, hurt and brutal violence against people who did not meet his demands.

Therefore, the applicant prayed for protection orders, compensation, and interim orders under the Act.

Advocate Sandeep Kapur of Karanjawala & Co. appeared on behalf of the applicant.

The matter was listed for further hearing on August 28.

Aisha Sultana Deleted Mobile Chats, Not Cooperating: Lakshadweep Administration

The Lakshadweep administration on Tuesday informed the Kerala High Court that filmmaker-activist Aisha Sultana, who is accused in a sedition case, deleted her mobile chats after the registration of the case by the Kavaratti Police.

Accusing her of not cooperating in the probe, the administration opposed Aisha’s plea to quash the case. They pointed out that it was suspicious that she deleted messages after the registration of the case.

The Lakshadweep Police on 10 June, booked filmmaker-activist Aisha Sultana for allegedly calling the Union territory’s administrator Praful K Patel a ‘bioweapon’. In a debate over the contentious reforms introduced in Lakshadweep, that had taken place on the Malayalam television channel MediaOne TV on 7 June, Sultana had allegedly said that the Centre was using Administrator Patel as a “bioweapon” against Lakshadweep.

“Before Centre took care, Lakshadweep had 0 cases of COVID-19. Now, it is reporting a daily spike of 100 cases. What the Centre has deployed is a bioweapon. I can say this clearly that the central government has deployed a bioweapon against the people of Lakshadweep,” she had said.

SULTANA’S ACTIONS SEEN AS SUSPICIOUS

The investigating officers had noted that Sultana seemed to have received messages from people during the panel discussion, where she made the controversial remarks. The administration claimed that these mobile chats have been suspiciously deleted by Sultana. Media One channel has also been accused of not cooperating.

Senior Central Government Standing Counsel S Manu alleged, “She has not been properly cooperating with the investigation and refused to provide documents demanded by the police. On the other hand, she raised several baseless allegations against police after filing of the above Crl MC and indulged in a malicious campaign against the police through media. Apparently, her aim is to dissuade the police from conducting a proper investigation by unleashing false propaganda.”

The administration stated that there has been good progress in the investigation process.

“The statement made by her has a tendency to create disorder or disturbance of public peace by resorting to violence. It also prima facie amounts to an assertion prejudicial to national integration. Hence the crime has been registered for the offences under Sections 124 A and 153B,” the administration said in the court submission.

The Kavaratti Police had registered FIRs against Sultana under Section 124A (sedition) and Section 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national-integration) of the IPC.

Judge Ashok Menon on July 17, granted Sultana interim protection from arrest while directing her to cooperate with the investigating officers. However, the Lakshadweep administration later filed an application with the court, alleging that while Sultana was on the islands, she broke COVID protocols multiple times.

Sultana hails from Chetiath Island in Lakshadweep and is a model, director, script writer and actor. She is the first woman filmmaker from Lakshadweep. She made her independent directorial debut in 2020 with her Malayalam film ‘Flush’, for which she also wrote the script.

European Union says use of spyware on journalists is unacceptable

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen welcomes Austrian President Alexander Van der Bellen (not pictured) in Brussels, Belgium, July 13, 2021. REUTERS/Pascal Rossignol/Pool

“Freedom of media, free press is one of the core values of the EU. It is completely unacceptable if this (hacking) were to be the case.”

The European Union on Monday condemned any spying on journalists, after reports that Israeli software had been used to hack the smartphones of journalists, government officials and rights activists worldwide.

What we could read so far – and this has to be verified, but if it is the case – it is completely unacceptable. Against any kind of rules we have in the European Union,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said during a visit to Prague.

An investigation published on Sunday by 17 media organizations, led by the Paris-based non-profit journalism group Forbidden Stories, said spyware made and licensed by the Israeli company NSO had been used in attempted and successful hacks of 37 smartphones belonging to journalists, government officials and human rights activists.

NSO said its product was intended only for use by vetted government intelligence and law enforcement agencies to fight terrorism and crime.

In a statement on its website, it said the information provided by the consortium’s sources “has no factual basis”.

The investigation, which Reuters did not independently confirm, did not reveal who had attempted the hacks or why.

The Hungarian investigative website Direkt36, part of the consortium, said the more than 300 targets in Hungary included journalists, businesspeople, lawyers and critics of Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government.null

Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said Hungary was unaware of the reported surveillance attempts but that he had asked the head of the Hungarian Information Office, a secret service under his supervision, to investigate.

FACEBOOK SUIT

Israeli Health Minister Nitzan Horowitz, head of the liberal Meretz party and a member of Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s decision-making security cabinet, said he would meet Defence Minister Benny Gantz to discuss NSO’s exports. The Defence Ministry, which licenses the exports, did not immediately comment.

The social media giant Facebook filed a suit in 2019 accusing NSO of facilitating government hacking sprees in 20 countries, after Facebook’s instant messaging platform WhatsApp said NSO had exploited a flaw in the program to help governments spy on more than 1,400 people worldwide, including diplomats, dissidents, journalists and senior government officials.

Other tech giants including Microsoft, Google, Cisco and Dell joined the case last December.

NSO denied the allegations in the suit “in the strongest possible terms”, saying it would fight them vigorously. An attempt to argue in court that NSO should benefit from sovereign immunity failed at the first instance.

“Can’t keep him in jail even for a day:” Supreme Court orders release of activist charged for FB post criticising use of Cow dung as COVID cure

"Can't keep him in jail even for a day:" Supreme Court orders release of activist charged for FB post criticising use of Cow dung as COVID cure

Manipuri activist Erendro Leichombam was booked under the National Security Act and kept in preventive detention for a Facebook post criticising BJP leaders for advocating cow-dung and cow-urine as cures for COVID.

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered the release of Manipuri activist Erendro Leichombam, who was booked under the National Security Act (NSA) for a Facebook post criticising Bharatiya Janata Party leaders for advocating cow-dung and cow-urine as cures for COVID.

A Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah said that the person cannot be kept in jail even for a day for such an act.

“He cannot be kept in jail even for a day. We will order his release today,” said Justice Chandrachud.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the government, told the Court that he will take instructions and requested that the matter be listed tomorrow but the Bench remained adamant that it will grant interim relief today.

The Court the proceeded to pass the order releasing him.

“We are of the view that continued detention of the petitioner would be a violation of right ti life and personal liberty under Article 21. We accordingly direct that the petitioner shall be released forthwith subject to interim directions of this court and subject to further orders and him filing a personal bond of Rs. 1,000,” the Court ordered.

The order has to be complied with on or before 5 pm today, the Court added.

Leichombam, who holds a postgraduate degree in public administration from Harvard University and is a former associate of activist Irom Sharmila, had for long spoken against state repression and militarisation, according to reports.

The plea filed in Supreme Court by his father, L Raghumani Singh through advocate Shadan Farasat stated that the detention of the activist is a reprisal for his criticism against Bharatiya Janata Party leaders for advocating cow-dung and cow-urine as cures for COVID.

Erendro, a Manipuri political activist, has been preventively detained solely to punish him for his criticism of Bhartiya Janta Party (“BJP”) leaders for advocating cow-dung and cow-urine as cures for COVID,” the petition said.

It is a shocking instance of misuse of preventive detention law to stifle completely innocuous speech that is fully constitutionally protected and was made in public interest, the petition further stated.

It was also submitted that the detention of the activist was in contempt of the April 30, 2021 order of the Supreme Court in the suo motu case of COVID-19 in which a Bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud had observed that no one should be punished for critiquing COVID policies over social media.

Material interests will have to be made subservient to the existence of the species: Justice DY Chandrachud speaks on Climate Change

Justice Chandrachud also gave the example of climate change activist, Greta Thunberg to point out that nobody is too young or too insignificant to make a difference on this planet.

We are in the midst of an accelerated climate crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic has shown us that ecological disruption exacerbates existing inequalities, Justice DY Chandrachud observed on Saturday.null

On the issue of climate change, Justice Chandrachud added,

“To combat this climate change crisis, we will require global action at an unprecedented rate and an engaged citizen rate with participation especially from students. Material interests will have to be made subservient to the existence of a species.”

He went on to give the example of climate change activist, Greta Thunberg to point out that nobody is too young or too insignificant to make a difference on this planet and said,

“Greta Thunberg, who is one of the strongest voices in civil society since climate change began her journey as a lone 15 year old, sitting outside the Swedish Parliament demanding action against the risks of global warming. Her example in addition to that of many others shows us that no one is too young or too insignificant to effectuate a big change”, he said.

Justice Chandrachud also gave his own example to instil the audience with hope that nobody is too old to make a difference either.

“My learning for life at this age if I may say so is that you’re never too old to become successful either,” the apex Court judge added.

Justice DY Chandrachud concluded his address with a quote from legal academician and philosopher Martha Nussbaum who had said,

It would be catastrophic to become a nation of technically competent people who have lost the ability to think critically, to examine themselves and respect the humanity and diversity of others.”

The Judge was speaking at the 101st birth anniversary celebrations of his father and former Supreme Court judge, Justice YV Chandrachud. The event was organised by Shikshana Prasaraka Mandali.

People know if things go wrong, judiciary will be with them: CJI N V Ramana

Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana. Photo: Special Arrangement

People are confident that they will get relief and justice from the judiciary. They know that when things go wrong, the judiciary will stand by them. The Indian Supreme Court is the guardian of the largest democracy,” Chief Justice of India N V Ramana said.

Chief Justice of India (CJI) N.V. Ramana on Saturday asserted that the Supreme Court would stand by the people to protect their civil liberties, while Justice D.Y. Chandrachud cautioned that any semblance of majoritarian tendencies or clampdown on civil or religious freedoms would upset a sacred promise made to the ancestors who accepted India as their Constitutional Republic.

The judge observed that the “danger to our freedoms may not only originate from those who are tasked to govern but also originate in the intolerance of persons in society as well”.

The CJI said the people of India knew that “when things go wrong”, the Supreme Court, as the guardian of the largest democracy, “will stand by them”.

The Chief Justice said the Constitution, together with the immense faith of the people in the judicial system, brought to life the Supreme Court’s motto Yato Dharma Sthato Jaya. “That is, where there is dharma, there is victory,” he explained, in his keynote address to a global audience at the Indo-Singapore Mediation Summit of 2021 organised by Singapore International Mediation Centre, CAMP Arbitration and Mediation Practice and Mediation Mantras.

Chief Justice of Singapore Sundaresh Menon congratulated Chief Justice Ramana on his recent appointment as top judge.

Chief Justice Ramana said conflicts were unavoidable in any society for a variety of reasons, including political, economic, social, cultural and religious.

But with conflicts, there was also the need to develop mechanisms for conflict resolution, the CJI stressed.

“India, and numerous Asian countries, have a long and rich tradition of collaborative and amicable settlement of disputes,” the Chief Justice stressed.

The CJI took a leaf from the Mahabharata to put his point across that peace through amicability was better than violence.

“Mahabharata, actually provides an example of an early attempt at mediation as a conflict resolution tool. Lord Krishna attempted to mediate the dispute between the Pandavas and Kauravas. It may be worthwhile to recall that the failure of mediation led to disastrous consequences,” Chief Justice Ramana said.

The Chief Justice said it was both “uncharitable” and an “overstatement” to blame pendency on judicial delay. Even a case filed 24 hours ago was added to the oft-quoted pendency statistic of 45 million cases.

“The term ‘pendency’ is used to refer to all cases which have not yet been disposed of, without any reference to how long the case has spent in the judicial system… This is, therefore, not a useful indicator of how well, or poorly, a system is doing,” Chief Justice Ramana noted.

The CJI said one of the chief reasons for delay was “luxurious litigation”.

“It is a specific type of litigation wherein parties with resources attempt to frustrate the judicial process and delay it by filing numerous proceedings across the judicial system… Undeniably, the prevailing pandemic has also contributed to our woes,” Chief Justice Ramana explained.

Another reason may be the sheer number of cases.

“This may have to be viewed in the context that India is the largest democratic republic in the world. The people believe in the constitutional project, of which the judiciary is an integral part. Judges in India, particularly in the constitutional courts, often burn the midnight oil to meet their judicial and administrative case load,” Chief Justice Ramana said.

The Chief Justice hailed the legal aid programme in the country as a “remarkable achievement,” which had ensured easier access to justice to nearly 70% of the population, particularly the poor, women, children, minorities, senior citizens and the differently abled.

The CJI referred to the impact of grassroots alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms like Lok Adalats organised by legal services authorities.

“Over 7.84 million cases were settled by the Lok Adalats in 2019 and 2020. Nearly 3.94 million cases were settled at the pre-litigation stage. This is despite the pandemic and was possible by building an efficient online dispute resolution system in India,” the CJI said.

He said ADR mechanisms such as mediation and conciliation were participatory.

“ADR mechanisms enable parties to become insiders to a process that traditionally treated them as outsiders… I have personally seen disputes that have subsisted for decades get resolved through the process of mediation, within a short time,” Chief Justice Ramana underscored.

The CJI highlighted the “moral dilemma” of mediators functioning in the economically and socially diverse context of India.

Earlier, they were expected to be only “passive guides” in the mediation process. But with more and more complex commercial problems coming for mediation, they were expected to provide active assistance, the CJI noted.

He posed questions at mediators functioning in the economically and socially diverse community context.

“What happens when one party is better situated – economically, socially and politically – than the other? What is the duty of a mediator if the settlement reached is patently unjust to the weaker party? Should the mediator be a silent spectator during such negotiations? These are just some of the questions which one must consider, particularly in a country like India with our diverse social fabric. The requirements of substantive equality are a bedrock of every Constitutional democracy, and these ideals must be reflected even during the dispute resolution process,” Chief Justice Ramana reminded.

Majoritarian tendencies

At a separate event to commemorate the 101st birth anniversary of his father and longest-serving CJI Y.V. Chandrachud, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, who is line to be the CJI, stated: “Majoritarian tendencies, whenever and however they arise, must be questioned against the background of our constitutive promise. Any semblance of authoritarianism, clampdown on civil liberties, sexism, casteism, otherisation on account of religion or region is upsetting a sacred promise that was made to our ancestors who accepted India as their Constitutional Republic.”

“Our nation was forged and united, with a promise of certain commitments and entitlements to each and every citizen. A promise of religious freedom, a promise of equality between persons, irrespective of sex, caste or religion, a promise of fundamental freedoms of speech and movement without undue State interference and an enduring right to life and personal liberty,” he stressed.

Is It Still Necessary To Continue Sedition Law, Which Was Used By British To Suppress Our Freedom Movement, Even After 75 Yrs Of Independence: CJI Ramana To Centre

The law, used against Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak, is prone to misuse by the government, says Chief Justice N.V. Ramana

Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana, in what may be an unprecedented judicial criticism of the way the sedition law is used by the government to crush liberties, asked why a colonial law used against Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak continued to survive in the law book after 75 years of Independence.

“Sedition is a colonial law. It suppresses freedoms. It was used against Mahatma Gandhi, Tilak… Is this law necessary after 75 years of Independence?” Chief Justice Ramana, heading a three-judge Bench, orally addressed Attorney General K.K. Venugopal and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre.

Is the law of sedition unconstitutional?

The CJI said sedition or Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code was prone to misuse by the government.

“The use of sedition is like giving a saw to the carpenter to cut a piece of wood and he uses it to cut the entire forest itself,” Chief Justice Ramana lashed out.

The CJI’s oral statement in open court takes a significant note amidst rising public denouncement of Central and State law enforcement agencies using the sedition law to silence dissent, muffle free expression and for denying bail to incarcerated activists, journalists, students and civil society members. A number of petitions have been filed highlighting the “chilling effect” sedition has on the fundamental right of free speech. The CJI’s remarks has also opened the floor for debate and introspection on the court’s own judgment in 1962, in the Kedar Nath case, which upheld Section 124A.

Should the sedition law be scrapped?

The CJI drew the attention of the Attorney General to the conviction rates under sedition.

“If you look at the history of use of this Section 124A of IPC, you will find that the conviction rate is very low. There is misuse of power by executive agencies,” the Chief Justice said.

Stale Laws: 

The CJI asked the government why it did not throw out the sedition law along with the hundreds of “stale laws” it had expunged from the statute books.

“Your government is taking out a lot of stale laws from the law books, why have they not looked into this,” Chief Justice Ramana asked Mr. Venugopal.

People had suffered and were scared of the misuse of the sedition law, Chief Justice Ramana said.

“We are not blaming any particular government or State. But do look at how Section 66A of the Information Technology Act is continuing to be used… How many unfortunate people have suffered? And there is no accountability for all this…” he noted.

The CJI said the sweeping powers of Section 124A gives even a village police officer carte blanche to trample on the right to liberty and free speech of ordinary citizens.

“If a police officer wants to fix anybody in a village for something, he can use Section 124A… People are scared. Our concern is misuse of the law and the lack of accountability. Why has it continued in the statute book even after 75 years of our Independence,” Chief Justice Ramana asked the government’s law officers repeatedly.

The Chief Justice said the Supreme Court would “definitely look into this Section 124A”.

Grave situation:

“The situation on the ground is grave… If one party does not like what the other is saying, Section 124A is used… It is a serious threat to the functioning of individuals and parties,” Chief Justice Ramana noted.

Mr. Venugopal submitted that the court need not strike down Section 124A.

“It is enough to see if there were any excesses in its use and limit the Section to its real purpose… That would be enough,” Mr. Venugopal said.

The Bench issued notice to the Centre on a petition filed by retired Army General S.G. Vombatkere, represented by advocates P.B. Suresh and Prasanna S., to quash Section 124A.

Delhi Court Fines, Raps Police Over Handling of Delhi Riots Case

Not for the first time, a Delhi court has chastised Delhi Police over its handling of the February 2020 communal violence in the northeastern part of the city.

Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav dismissed the Delhi Police’s revision petition against an October 2020 order of the court in which police had been directed to register an FIR based on one Mohammad Nasir’s complaint. Nasir had alleged that he had suffered a gunshot injury in his eye when rioters attacked him.

Judge Yadav has also imposed a fine of Rs 25,000 on the Bhajanpura police station’s station house officer and his supervising officers and noted that “police have miserably failed in their statutory duties” in the case, reported Indian Express.

The Delhi court also says that police has sought to create a “defence for the accused persons named in Nasir’s complaint”.

The investigation in case FIR No.64/2020 “has been done in a most casual, callous and farcical manner,” the order, quoted by The Quint, reads.

The judge has also sent the order to the Delhi Commissioner of Police in order for him to note the lacunae in investigation and supervision on the matter and so that he can take remedial action.

The Delhi Police have faced several accusations of bias and complicity in the riots.

The complaint

In his complaint, Nasir had mentioned that a mob led by Naresh Tyagi, Shubhash Tyagi, Uttam Tyagi and Sushil had perpetrated the injuries on him during the riots. A report by The Quint had established close links between the named and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.

“All the members of the mob were raising slogans of ‘Jai Shree Ram’ and were lighting fire on houses/shops of Muslims and were also attacking them with pistols and petrol bombs… After being shot when the complainant (Nasir) reached near his home, his father and brother saw him and got worried and called 100 number thrice in order to call for PCR (police control room) but the police department did not help them,” Nasir’s complaint, submitted on March 19, 2020, had alleged.

He had also informed the police that he was allegedly receiving death threats from Naresh over the complaint. On July 3, Nasir had sent a letter to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (north east) for protection under the Delhi Witness Protection Scheme, but alleged in court that he had received no help.

On October 27, 2020, Metropolitan Magistrate Richa Manchanda directed the Bhajanpura Police Station SHO to lodge the case within 24 hours of receiving the order and file a status report by November 25.

In court, police claimed that an FIR had already been filed noting that Nasir and six more people had suffered gunshot injuries and that no “evidence was found against the persons named by Nasir,” according to Indian Express. 

“The police also said Naresh and Uttam were not even present in Delhi at the relevant time and Sushil was present in his office,” the report notes.

Nasir, represented by advocate Mehmood Pracha, said that several offences spanning two days, February 24 and 25, had been clubbed in that FIR. The court, in its July 13, 2021, order also recognised this and noted that the alleged assault on Nasir took place on February 24 in North Ghonda while the other attacks took place on February 25 at Maujpur, and these could not be clubbed in the same FIR.

In April 2021, the same judge had observed that the Delhi Police’s senior officers have displayed a “complete lack of supervision” and that the practice of clubbing several FIRs into one has been used to “protect the accused” in the riots.

Judge Yadav also noted how Section 307 of IPC (shooting with an intention to kill) and Section 25 of Arms Act had not been invoked while registering the FIR even though several people had received – in a fact acknowledged by the police – gunshot wounds.

Judge Yadav also made note of the fact that the case diary mentions a lack of eye witness in Nasir’s case, even though the medico-legal case file clearly showed his address.

The court, according to The Quint, also said that Nasir, was ‘free to exhaust his remedies available to him in accordance with law” to get a separate FIR registered in respect to his complaint.

Supreme Court Takes Note of UP Govt’s Decision to Allow Kanwar Yatra

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took suo motu cognisance of news on Uttar Pradesh government’s decision to allow the Kanwar Yatra amidst the COVID-19 pandemic and sought responses from the state as well as the Centre on the matter.

The court took note of a report published in The Indian Express newspaper on Uttar Pradesh going ahead with the religious festival even though Uttarakhand had cancelled it.

“We read something disturbing in The Indian Express today that the state of UP has chosen to continue with the Kanwar Yatra, while the state of Uttarakhand with its hindsight of experience, has said that there will be no Yatra,” Justice R.F. Nariman, who was heading the bench, told the Solicitor General.

The “hindsight of experience” ostensibly referred to the Kumbh Mela held in March and April, in Uttarakhand, where millions gathered for dips in the river at a time when cases of COVID-19 were rapidly rising in the second wave of the pandemic.

Justice Nariman referred to a statement by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the impermissibility of compromises on COVID-19 containment.

“The citizens of India are completely perplexed. They don’t know what is going on. And all this amid the Prime Minister, when asked about a third wave of COVID striking the nation, saying ‘we cannot compromise even one bit’,” the bench said.

It issued a notice to the Centre and the state governments of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand and posted the matter for hearing on Friday.

“We wish to know what the stand of the respective governments is,” said the bench also comprising Justice B.R. Gavai.

“We want them to file an early response so that the matter can be heard on Friday,” the top court said.

The Adityanath government on Tuesday allowed the yatra from July 25 despite concerns raised from various quarters over the risk posed by such events in triggering a possible third wave of COVID-19.

The Indian Medical Association had expressed concern on July 12, over governments and people getting complacent and engaging in mass gatherings without following COVID-19 protocols, saying these events are potential super spreaders for a third wave of the pandemic.

The Uttar Pradesh chief minister has said that only a minimum number of people would be allowed to participate in the annual Kanwar Yatra and said that “strict implementation of COVID-19 protocol” will be implemented.

Every year, tens of thousands of ‘kanwariyas‘ (devotees of Lord Shiva) from northern states travel on foot or by other means to collect water from River Ganga at Haridwar to offer at Shiva temples in their areas as part of the yatra.

Uttarakhand Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami said a day ago that though “Kanwar Yatra is part of sanatan culture, saving lives in the time of the pandemic was paramount.”