Hindustan Times ST (Mumbai)

HC JUDGE DISAGREES WITH CAA COMMENTS IN JUDGMENT

- Kanchan Chaudhari kanchan.chaudhari@htlive.com

JAMAAT CASE

MUMBAI: A Bombay high court (HC) judge, who was a part of a two-member division bench that quashed cases registered against 28 foreign members of the Tablighi Jamaat and six trustees of local mosques in a strongly worded order, has said he disagrees with certain remarks in the August 21 judgment.

The order said the foreigners were virtually persecuted and added that a “political government tries to find scapegoat when there is pandemic or calamity”. The bench of justice TV Nalawade and justice MG Sewlikar cited the material related to the case and added it shows “that the propaganda against the so-called religious activity [of the members of the Jamaat] was unwarrante­d”.

Justice Sewlikar passed a separate order on Thursday, saying he especially disagreed with a paragraph regarding protests against the Citizenshi­p (Amendment) Act or CAA, and National Register of Citizens (NRC).

In the August 21 order, the bench observed the action against the Jamaat members created fear among those Muslims, who protested against CAA and NRC. “This action (against Tablighi members) indirectly gave warning to Indian Muslims that action in any form and for anything can be taken against Muslims. It was indicated that even for keeping contact with Muslims of other countries, action will be taken against them. Thus, there is the smell of malice to the action taken against these foreigners and Muslims for their alleged activities,” the division bench said.

Justice Sewlikar said he finds it difficult to concur with these observatio­ns as allegation­s in this respect were not made in the petitions of Jamaat members nor is there is any evidence in this regard. “Therefore, in my opinion, these observatio­ns are outside the scope of the petitions,” he said. Justice Sewlikar maintained the cases against the foreigners and their hosts in Ahmednagar were liable to be quashed for the want of evidence.

The division bench struck down criminal proceeding­s against the 28 foreigners and six locals, observing that they were “virtually persecuted.” It cited the latest figures of Covid-19 infection and said they show the action against the foreigners should not have been taken.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India