Supreme Court News: Several FIRs were filed over allegations of “mass conversion” of Hindus to Christianity in Uttar Pradesh’s Fatehpur district. While deciding these petitions, the Supreme Court observed that the criminal law cannot be used as a weapon to harass innocent citizens. Also, all these FIRs were also quashed.
Justice J. B. A bench of Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra gave a landmark decision. In this decision, a total of five FIRs filed against Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology and Science (SHUATS) Vice-Chancellor Rajendra Bihari Lal were quashed.
Bangladesh News : Fire breaks out at Dhaka International Airport in Bangladesh; Cargo area burnt, many flights cancelled
Delivering a detailed 158-page judgement, Justice Pardiwala said, “The FIR in this case lacks credible evidence along with legal and procedural lapses. Therefore, continuation of such cases would be a “mockery of justice”, the court explained.
Referring to the glaring flaws in the FIRs registered in 2022, the court noted, “Criminal law cannot be used as a weapon to torture or harass innocent persons. Otherwise, public prosecutors will be free to pursue cases at their discretion based on completely unreliable evidence.”
Referring to the facts in the FIR, the court said, “Police could not overcome the problem by delaying a single alleged incident and then starting a fresh investigation against the same accused. Unfortunately, that is the only conclusion we can draw from the available records.” The bench rejected the argument that the court should not exercise its power under Article 32 of the Constitution (right to approach the Supreme Court for enforcement of fundamental rights) to quash the FIR.
Pak-Afghan War : Another attack by Pakistan on Afghanistan; Dozens of Taliban terrorists were killed
As the highest constitutional court of the country, this court secures the fundamental rights of the people through the powers conferred under Part 3 of the Constitution. The right to seek constitutional remedy is itself a fundamental right, therefore this court has the ultimate responsibility to enforce these rights, the bench said. Once the Constitution assigns this responsibility to the Supreme Court, litigants do not have to resort to any other alternative avenue for complaints about violation of fundamental rights.
The court discussed in detail most of the cases in the six FIRs filed in the case and pointed out the glaring errors and deficiencies therein. In particular, it was pointed out that in alleged cases of conversion, no person reported directly to the police. In respect of one of the six FIRs, the court rejected the plea and ordered a retrial of that offence. However, the court clarified that the temporary protection granted earlier to the concerned accused shall remain in effect till the final decision.
