The Supreme Court today expressed concern over exploitation of caste, religion and other divisive tactics during violent mass demonstrations in which protesters destroy public and private property making task difficult for police who also become target of the mob.
The court, which made the remarks while awarding a compensation ranging from Rs one lakh to two lakh to three Kashmiri migrants who were assaulted by the police in Jammu and Kashmir during a protest in 2007, also noted that there were numerous instances where separatist groups have "provoked violence" making the task difficult and delicate for the cops.
It said in curbing such violence or dispersing unlawful assemblies, police have to accomplish their task with utmost care as law and order needs to be restored but it should also be ensured that "unnecessary force" is not used.
Also Read
"In Kashmir itself there have been numerous instances where separatist groups have provoked violence. In this scenario, task of the police and law enforcing agencies becomes more difficult and delicate," the bench comprising justices A K Sikri and R K Agrawal said.
"In curbing such violence or dispersing unlawful assemblies, police has to accomplish its task with utmost care, deftness and precision. Thus, on the one hand, law and order needs to be restored and at the same time, it is also to be ensured that unnecessary force or the force beyond what is absolutely essential is not used," it said.
The bench, which was dealing with the petition of three Kashmiri migrants who had planned to take out peaceful protest march up to Delhi for ventilating their grievances and were assaulted by the police in Jammu and Kashmir in 2007, said "Policemen are required to undergo special training to deal with these situations."
"Many times the situations turn ugly or go out of control because of lack of sufficient training to the police personnel to deal with violence and challenges to their authority," it said while expressing its displeasure that frequent exploitation on grounds of caste, religious, regional language and class divisions to foment violence during demonstrations is "unfortunate".
The bench said, "It is also becoming a common ground that
religious, ethnic, regional language, caste and class divisions are frequently exploited to foment violence whenever mass demonstrations or dharnas etc take place. It is unfortunate that more often than not, such protestors take to hooliganism, vandalism and even destroy public/private property."
"In the process, when police tries to control, the protestors/mob violently target policemen as well. Unruly groups and violent demonstrations are so common that people have become to see them as an appendage of Indian democracy. All these situations frequently result in police using force. This in turn exacerbates public anger against the police," it said.
The court's observation came while awarding compensation of Rs 2 lakh to Anita Thakur, who is a general secretary of the Jammu and Kashmir Panthers Party, and Rs 1 lakh each to the party's secretary and a senior journalist who were beaten up by the police on August 7, 2007 during the protest.
According to the petitioners, the march up to Delhi was for highlighting the grievances of Jammu migrants, who were forced to leave their homes between 1996-1999 due to the terrorist attacks on these families.
The apex court said that after going through the materials placed before it, they have found that initially it was the protestors who had taken the law into their hands by turning their peaceful agitation into a violent one but the police continued use of force beyond limits after they had controlled the mob.
"They (police) had virtually apprehended these petitioners making them immobile. However, their attack on these petitioners continued even thereafter when it was not at all needed. As far as injuries suffered by these petitioners are concerned, such a situation could clearly be avoided," the bench said.
(Reopens LGD 45)
The bench said, "It is apparent that to that extent, respondents misused their power. To that extent, fundamental right of the petitioners, due to police excess, has been violated. In such circumstances, in exercise of its power under Article 32 of the Constitution, this court can award compensation to the petitioners."
The apex court said that when an assembly is peaceful, use of police force is not warranted at all but when the assembly becomes violent, "it may necessitate and justify using reasonable police force."
It said that it becomes a "more serious problem" when the police "indulges in excesses and crosses the limit by using excessive force thereby becoming barbaric or by not halting even after controlling the situation and continuing its tirade".
"This results in violation of human rights and human dignity. That is the reason that human rights activists feel that police frequently abuses its power to use force and that becomes a serious threat to the rule of law," it said.
The bench noted that holding peaceful demonstration in order to air the grievances and to see that their voice is heard in the relevant quarters is the right of the people and it can be traced to the fundamental freedom guaranteed under the Constitution.
"It hardly needs elaboration that a distinguishing feature of any democracy is the space offered for legitimate dissent. One cherished and valuable aspect of political life in India is a tradition to express grievances through direct action or peaceful protest. Organised, non-violent protest marches were a key weapon in the struggle for independence, and the right to peaceful protest is now recognised as a fundamental right in the Constitution," it said.
The bench, however, said that it should also be borne in mind that these rights were subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, as well as public order.
