The Supreme Court today said that it cannot pass an order to end alleged social boycott of the Dalit community in violence-hit Mirchpur village in Haryana as it would be an "ineffective" one.
"What is the solution to end the social boycott? The courts cannot say that end the social boycott of Dalits. It would be an ineffective order," the social justice bench of justices M B Lokur and U U Lalit said.
The court was hearing a PIL seeking rehabilitation and relocation of Dalit community members from Mirchpur in Rohtak district.
An old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter of the village were killed by members of dominant Jat community in 2010, sparking fear among the Dalits.
The bench today asked the counsel for Haryana to apprise it as to whether a judicial panel headed by Justice Iqbal Singh has filed its report on the incident.
Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for Dalit community members, said that they are living under constant threat as the dominant community members feel that because of them some persons have been convicted in the case.
Moreover, the appeals against the conviction of some members of the dominant community are pending in the Delhi High Court and Dalits feel threatened, he said.
"We are also suffering the social boycott," he said, adding that the entire state is not hostile to the community and hence, they be given land at some other place to live.
The counsel, appearing for Haryana, however, said that one company of CRPF personnel is camping in the village since 2010 and there has been such incidents thereafter against Dalit community members there.
Meanwhile, Gonsalves said that he will not press for the relief that the members of Dalit community be rehabilitated in Delhi and added rather, they be given land at some other place in Haryana itself.
Earlier, the apex court had dubbed the incident as "scar on the society" and had expressed its anguish after the then Congress-led state government said the 70-year-old man and his handicap daughter were "trapped" in the house after it was set on fire and the trial court has not held their death as murder.
