Hindustan Times (Chandigarh)

HC to decide whether it can make dera head pay for damages

- HT Correspond­ent

CHANDIGARH The Punjab and Haryana high court has decided to ponder over whether it can make Dera Sacha Sauda head, Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, pay for the damage to public or private properties in the violence reported in Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh after his conviction in two rape cases, on Friday.

The court would also decide whether the expenses for the loss and damages could be recovered and whether it would include expenses on the arrangemen­ts for mobilisati­on of security forces.

It would further examine whether the compensati­on amount can be recovered from persons indulging in the agitation that turned violent.

Thirty-eight people have lost their lives in the violence following conviction of the dera head on Friday.

In Panchkula, where nearly 2 lakh followers had assembled 32 people had died and property worth crores were damaged.

A full bench comprising justice SS saron, justice Surya Kant and justice Avneesh Jhingan passed these orders during the resumed hearing of a public interest litigation (PIL), initially filed seeking proper security arrangemen­ts, ahead of verdict in rape cases against dera head.

The court would also examine in what conditions court can entertain PILs relating to law and order and further whether when the police should use “full force” and when rubber bullets, water cannons etc. should be used.

It would also examine whether Haryana failed to perform its duty in preventing mass scale gathering in Panchkula or whether there was any complicity on the part of state with the agitators.

The HC would also examine whether religious, political organisati­ons can give a call to its followers to assemble with the intent to commit acts of violence.

It also directed the government to make arrangemen­ts to provide proper medical aid to the injured.

The court disposed of a PIL seeking action against BJP MP Sakshi Maharaj observing that it would “side-track and distract” the court from the main issue of law and order.

Maharaj had given a statement in favour of the godman Ram Rahim despite court asking politician­s to refrain from doing so.

DON’T ‘MISQUOTE’ ORALOBSERV­ATIONS, HC TELLS MEDIA

The HC bench asked journalist­s to not to “misquote oral observatio­ns” of the court. “We once again impress upon the media to play a pro-active role in this issue and not to misquote the oral observatio­ns made in court,” the high court bench’s order released on Wednesday says.

Earlier on Tuesday, the court had orally said that the media reported oral observatio­ns in respect of the Prime Minister “out of context”.

Several media organisati­ons had reported observatio­ns of court made during Friday’s hearing, “The Prime Minister is of the nation and not the BJP”.

However, on Tuesday, the court at the beginning of hearing had said that the media quoted observatio­ns “out of context”.

Senior advocate Anupam Gupta had submitted that there was no need for the court to “clarify” and that it would send out a “wrong signal”.

To this, the court had said that it was not “wilting under any kind of pressure” but media should report “responsibl­y”.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India