SC rejects hearing on petition for SIT probe

The bench found ‘no reason’ for an immediate hearing

THE PETITION ALSO DEMANDED SUITABLE COMPENSATION FOR THOSE INJURED DURING THE CASTE CLASHES

The Supreme Court refused on Friday early hearing of a public interest litigation (PIL) demanding constitution of a special investigation team (SIT) to probe the Saharanpur riots, during which members of the upper caste community allegedly torched Dalit houses.

A bench headed by Justice LN Rao told the petitioner’s lawyer that it found no reason for granting an immediate hearing to the matter. The bench said the case could be heard in July in due course.

Filed by advocate Gaurav Yadava, the petition called for a SIT probe under the supervision of a retired high court judge.

He claimed that the violence continued after the May 5 incident in Saharanpur’s Shabirpur village, where the alleged perpetrators destroyed vehicles and also stole valuables belonging to Dalits. According to the petitioner, around 30 to 40 people are still missing and close to 150 people have left their villages fearing for their life and valuables. In his PIL, Yadava demanded police protection for the affected families so that more of them are not forced to migrate and asked for a compensation for those who got injured during the riots.

Yadava stated in his petition that the violence had affected around 5,000 people, who were now forced to live in a tense atmosphere. He also claimed that the police lathi charged innocents, which left around 100 villagers injured.

No case has been registered against the alleged assailants. The SIT probe would be impartial and independent, Yadava said in his petition.

The petition stated that the incident was a violation of human and fundamental rights of Dalit families who were being repeatedly attacked by the members of upper castes.

“The perpetrator(s) fearlessly violated the rule of law and infringed (upon) the fundamental right to life and property (of the Dalit families)”, the petition claimed and added that “fresh violence/clashes kept erupting in Saharanpur due to complete failure of law and order”.

The petitioner held the local administration and police responsible for not registering any criminal case, stating that “The local administration did not value the damage and losses of the victims,” and the state failed to make any rehabilitation plan.