Protesters’ count doesn’t give them superior right: HC

: The protesters do not derive any superior right merely because of their capacity to assemble together and to make themselves heard, the Punjab and Haryana high court has said in a dispute between a private firm and agitating protesters in Ferozepur, running into five months now.

The court not only sought details of leaders of the protesters but also constituted a committee to evaluate losses incurred by the firm. The state has also been asked to deposit Rs 15 crore in the high court registry, which may be given to the firm as compensation.

“Those who are silent and suffer cannot be deemed to have waived their rights to carry on their trade, occupation or business. Their sufferance cannot be interpreted as their support. The process of law stands not only for those who make themselves heard but it also must discharge its obligation towards those who remain unheard,” the bench of justice Vinod S Bhardwaj said.

The observations came in a case pending before the high court since July, when a private firm, Malbros International Private Limited, approached the court, complaining against losses being incurred by it due to a protest by locals who have shut the plant down.

The firm, an alcohol-making unit, is located at Mansurwal village of Zira assembly in Ferozepur. The locals have accused the firm of violating environmental norms. But reports submitted in court have given a clean chit to the firm. The government was told on multiple occasions to remove the protesters from site. But the government, even though admitted that the firm was following all laid down laws and had all requisite clearances, failed to remove the protesters.

“The clamour of the some cannot leave the court to turn a deaf ear to those not crying or airing their grievances and it cannot be construed that they have none,” the court said, further adding that instead of resolving the issue the government had instead allowed the problem to swell to create compelling circumstances for the court to shoulder the responsibility of their inaction.

Senior advocate Puneet Bali, who appeared in this case, said this order should serve as a warning for the governments in future.

“The government was supposed to uphold the majesty of law. On three occasions, the court ordered for removal of protesters. The courts can’t be a mute spectator to a situation where the government is showing helplessness,” Bali remarked.