Habeas corpus to 4G services: Pleas in SC

NEWDELHI:AUGUST 5 marks the first anniversary of the effective abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution that conferred special status on Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) and the reorganisation of the state into two Union territories. Numerous petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court against the changes. Here is a look at where those cases stand.

The petitioners included editor of Kashmir Times newspaper, Anuradha Bhasin, and Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad.

A three-judge top court bench comprisingjusticesnvramana,rsubhashreddy and BR Gavai heard the case and ruled on January 10 that all restrictive orders should be reviewed by the government.

Importantly, it held that freedom of speech and expression and freedom to carry on trade or profession through the internet was a fundamental right under Article 19 of the Constitution and any order suspending internet services can be only for a temporary duration and not for an indefinite period. Such orders should indicate the reasons for the necessity of such a shutdown and they should be put in the public domain, the court ruled.

While the court did say that prohibitionsonfreespeechandmovementwillbe violative of fundamental rights, it did not strike down such prohibitions. Instead, it askedthegovernmentitselftoreviewsuch restrictions. The practical impact of this judgment was little although the government subsequently eased many restrictions in the Valley.

Omar Abdullah: Former J&K chief minister Omar Abdullah’s detention was challenged in February by his sister Sara Abdullah Pilot. The top court on February 14 issued notice to the J&K administration but the petition became infructuous (pointless) after Abdullah was released on March 24.

Mehbooba Mufti: Iltija Mufti , the daughter of former CM Mehbooba Mufti challenged Mufti’s detention under the stringent Public Safety Act (PSA) Act, saying that it was based on vague and slanderous grounds that demonstrated personal and political bias against her.

In her petition, Iltija Mufti said that the February 5 order shifting her mother from preventive custody to detention under the PSA was based on a dossier prepared by the superintendent of police, Srinagar, replete with personal remarks and in bad taste. The court issued notice to the Centre on February 26 but the matter has not been heard after that.

Saifuddin Soz: This would be the most noteworthy of all the Habeas Corpus pleas from J&K in Supreme Court.

Congress leader and former union minister Saifuddin Soz’s detention was challenge before the Supreme Court on June 1 by his wife Mumtazunnisa Soz.

Soz, an octogenarian, has been under detention since August 5, 2019.

When the petition came up for hearing on June 8, the SC sought the response of the Centre and J&K. The Centre filed an affidavit in July stating that Soz was never under detention and the petition was frivolous. It was stated that Soz has been given security personnel for his protection and he is free to go anywhere.

The SC disposed of the case on July 29 after recording the centre’s stance. There was a twist in the tale as Soz was captured on video by TV channels stating that he was under house arrest. Interestingly, the order passed by the Supreme Court on July 29 disposing of the petition is yet to be uploaded on the website of the court.