We’re going through tough times, says CJI Bobde in anti-CAA News stir-India
When lawyer Vineet Dhanda asked a CJI sA Bobde bank and judges BR Gavai and Surya Kant to list a Puneet K Dhanda PIL that sought to declare constitutional caA and make it mandatory for all states to implement it, the CJI said : , there’s a lot of violence. You (Dhanda) can create more problems (with your plea). We’re going through a difficult period. These are difficult times. Suggest methods to create peace.”
The CJI said: “Your request is different. This is the first time we’ve heard a petition telling the SC to declare a constitutional law.” Normally, the SC examines the validity of a law and declares it constitutional or unconstitutional.
However, the bank released the hearing petition on Friday, although it has scheduled a hearing according to 60 other petitions challenging the validity of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act on January 22.
On December 18, the SC had entertained a large number of petitions in search of changes to the Citizenship Act designed to speed up citizenship of Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Parsis and Jains from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. The petitioners said the non-inclusion of Muslims in the provisions of the CAA made it anti-secular and also violated the right to equality. On 16 December, the SC had refused to be “harassed” by activist lawyers to accept petitions alleging police excesses against students from Jamia Millia Islamia and Aligarh Muslim University.
The bank run by CJI SA Bobde had said: “We are not saying who is responsible, the police or the students. We’re saying the riots must stop. We have enough experience as judges to know how the riots begin and what the rights of the protesters are. We can’t decide in this kind of atmosphere. All riots must stop. What is this vandalism of public property? We will take knowledge in a fresh frame of mind. We’re not going to be bullied like that to hear the matter. We want all violence to stop if you want the court to intervene.” On 17 December, the Supreme Court had asked petitioners to take their grievances to their respective high courts.