New Delhi, July 19 (UNI) The Supreme Court has directed the concerned government (Gujarat government) to deal with the issue of granting sanction against state Chief Minister Narendra Modi and VHP leader Ashok Singhal, within three months in connection with delivering inflammatory speeches during last assembly elections instigating people against members of the minority community.
A bench comprising justices Mr Arijit Pasayat, Mr P K Balasubryamanyan and Mr D K Jain without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case also directed the petitioner to approach the court a magistrate for registration of an FIR in case the police was not doing its duty.
Petitioner Aleque Padamsse and others had lodged a complaint in Maharashtra against the two leaders but later Maharashtra police transferred the case to Gujarat on the grounds that the speeches were delivered not in Maharashtra but in Gujarat.
Gujarat police did not do anything and no case was registered at all. The petitioner approached this court under Article 31 of the Constitution of India for directions to the state police to register a case against the two.
The petitioner relied on the judgment of the apex court in Ramesh Kumari vs State of Delhi and others laying down that whenever a cognizable offence is disclosed the police is bound to register the case.
The apex court while disposing of the petitions noted ''the correct position in law therefore is that the police officials ought to register the FIR whenever facts brought to its notice show that cognizable offence has been made out. In case police fails to do so the modalities to be adopted are set out in Section 190 read with Section 200 of CrPC.'' The court issued directions that it is open to any person aggrieved by the inaction of the police officials to adopt the remedy in terms of Section 190 read with Section 200 of the code.
Regarding sanction required under Section 196 of CrPC the court directed ''so far as non-grant of sanction aspect is concerned, it is for the concerned government to deal with the prayer. The concerned governement would do well to deal with the matter within three months from the date of receipt of this order. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.'' UNI
A bench comprising justices Mr Arijit Pasayat, Mr P K Balasubryamanyan and Mr D K Jain without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case also directed the petitioner to approach the court a magistrate for registration of an FIR in case the police was not doing its duty.
Petitioner Aleque Padamsse and others had lodged a complaint in Maharashtra against the two leaders but later Maharashtra police transferred the case to Gujarat on the grounds that the speeches were delivered not in Maharashtra but in Gujarat.
Gujarat police did not do anything and no case was registered at all. The petitioner approached this court under Article 31 of the Constitution of India for directions to the state police to register a case against the two.
The petitioner relied on the judgment of the apex court in Ramesh Kumari vs State of Delhi and others laying down that whenever a cognizable offence is disclosed the police is bound to register the case.
The apex court while disposing of the petitions noted ''the correct position in law therefore is that the police officials ought to register the FIR whenever facts brought to its notice show that cognizable offence has been made out. In case police fails to do so the modalities to be adopted are set out in Section 190 read with Section 200 of CrPC.'' The court issued directions that it is open to any person aggrieved by the inaction of the police officials to adopt the remedy in terms of Section 190 read with Section 200 of the code.
Regarding sanction required under Section 196 of CrPC the court directed ''so far as non-grant of sanction aspect is concerned, it is for the concerned government to deal with the prayer. The concerned governement would do well to deal with the matter within three months from the date of receipt of this order. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.'' UNI
Oneindia Login