Supreme Court tells PIL petitioner not to be selective while highlighting mob lynching cases

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the lawyers appearing in a Public Interesting Litigation (PIL) related to mob violence to not be selective about the cases which they highlight before the Court [National Federation of Indian Women vs Union of India and ors]..The bench of Justices BR Gavai, Aravind Kumar and Sandeep Mehta particularly asked about the murder of Udaipur-based tailor Kanhaiya Lal, who was killed in 2022 for allegedly sharing a social media post of former Bharathiya Janta Party spokesperson Nupur Sharma regarding Prophet Mohammad."What about that tailor in Rajasthan..Kanhaiya Lal... who was lynched," asked the Court.When Advocate Nizam Pasha, who represents the petitioners, submitted that it was not included in the present petition, the Court said,"You have to ensure that it is not selective at all if all States are there...".At this point, the counsel representing the Gujarat government submitted that only cases of Muslims being lynched were being highlighted before the Court."This is just mob lynching of Muslims," Senior Advocate Archana Pathak Dave submitted. The Court, however, remarked that such arguments should not be made."Don't make submissions based on what we say... we are saying it is not about religion or caste.. it has to be about the overall issue which is prevailing," it said while asking lawyers to be careful about their submissions in court..The bench was hearing the (PIL) petition raising concerns about a rise in incidents of mob violence against minorities and seeking immediate interim compensation for the families of victims of mob lynching.The top court had in July last year sought the response of the Central government and the Police of six States.The "rampant rise in mob violence and lynching" was the natural consequence of lack of action by the State, resulting from a "general narrative of ostracization" that minority communities face, it has been argued in the plea..During the hearing today, advocate Pasha submitted that the top court's directions in Tehseen Poonawalla judgment to prevent mob violence was being violated by States.While referring to an incident from Madhya Pradesh, he said,"The affidavit by the State shows that it was not mob lynching but a general scuffle. News reports show that it was lynching due to alleged beef transportation. if the state just denies the incident then how will the judgment be followed?"Questioning the State's action in the case, Justice Gavai asked,"Why no FIR against the 10-12 persons who committed battery against the two?"The counsel representing the State assured the Court that the case will be looked into.Pasha highlighted a case from Haryana as well. "Best way is to deny that it is mob lynching at all ! that is what is happening," he said..While adjourning the matter, the Court said that the States have to at least respond to what action has been taken in such cases. "We grant six weeks time to all the States who have not filed replies and also detail steps taken by them in such cases. Put up after vacations," it said.