"Right To Life Over Right To Speech": Top Court On Release Of Udaipur Files
The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Centre's committee to take its decision in petitions related to the controversial movie "Udaipur Files: Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder", "immediately, without loss of time", considering the urgency expressed by the makers of the film.
When the filmmakers contended that the Delhi High Court erred in stalling the film's release as the stay order violated the makers' right to freedom of speech and expression, the top court remarked that Article 21 (Fundamental Right to Life) will precede Article 19 (Fundamental Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression).
The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked filmmakers to await the Central government's decision, which is scheduled to hear objections against the movie later in the day, as it adjourned the hearing of the petitions related to the matter to next Monday.
"The Competent Authority (of the Central government) has taken cognisance of the revision petition over the release of the film pending before it and will be heard at 2:30 pm today," the court stated.
The court told the filmmakers that the accused in the Kanhaiya Lal tailor murder case-- Mohammad Javed--can't be compensated for the loss of reputation if the film is released, but the filmmakers can be monetarily compensated.
Justice Kant further remarked that in the film business, it's known that the more suspense around the movie, the better it is.
Senior counsel Gaurav Bhatia, appearing for filmmakers, has submitted that the producer and director of the film, as well as the son of late Kanhaiya Lal, were receiving death threats. The Court allowed them to make a representation to the police of the area, who were directed to assess the threat perception and do the needful to prevent harm if there is substance in their apprehension.
The top court was dealing with two petitions - one writ petition filed by one of the accused in the Kanhaiya Lal Teli murder case (on which the movie is based), and the second, filed by the makers of the movie challenging the Delhi High Court order staying the release of the movie.
The bench asked the Centre's committee to take a decision immediately without loss of time after hearing all the parties.
The Court also allowed Mohammad Javed to present his arguments before the committee through his counsel. "We permit Mohammad Javed (accused before the Court) to enter appearance through counsel before the central government in the pending revision petition, and we direct the committee to afford hearing to him as well. Having regard to the nature of the proceedings, we expect that the Committee will decide the revision petition immediately without any loss of time," the bench said.
The film was scheduled to be released on July 11. On July 10, the Delhi High Court stayed the release till the Centre decides on pleas seeking a permanent ban over the film's potential to "promote disharmony" in society.
The petitions, including one filed by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind president and Darul Uloom Deoband principal Maulana Arshad Madani before the high court, claim that a trailer of the movie released on June 26 was replete with dialogues and instances that had led to communal disharmony in 2022, and carries every potential to stoke the same sentiments again.
Udaipur-based tailor Kanhaiya Lal was murdered in June 2022, allegedly by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous. The assailants later released a video claiming that the murder was in reaction to the tailor allegedly sharing a social media post in support of former BJP leader Nupur Sharma following her controversial comments on Prophet Mohammed.
The case was probed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), and the accused were booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, besides provisions under the Indian Penal Code.
The trial is pending before the special NIA court in Jaipur.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
SC asks Delhi government to issue order declaring Lodhi-era 'Gumti of Shaikh Ali' protected monument
In a significant step, the Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Delhi government to issue a fresh notification to declare the historic, Lodhi-era monument "Gumti of Shaikh Ali" as a protected monument under the law. The two-judge bench of the top court, headed by Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, passed the direction to the Delhi govt after hearing an appeal filed by Defence Colony resident Rajeev Suri, who sought a direction to declare the Gumti as a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (AMASR Act). Suri had knocked the doors of the apex court after his plea was earlier dismissed by the Delhi High Court. During the course of the hearing on Wednesday, the top court went through some report filed by the Delhi government, including a notification and clarified that it was not 'happily (properly) worded'. 'Let the notification (to declare the monument as a protected one under the law) be re-issued by the Delhi government,' the bench told the Delhi govt. Making it clear that there should not be any illegal structures or encroachments near the area, the court asked the authorities to demolish the illegal structures, if any, inside the monument site. It directed the court commissioner to visit and inspect the concerned area and apprise the bench about the work undertaken in pursuance of the directions issued.
New Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Re-arrest in Arms Act case despite procedural lapse is legal, rules Delhi HC
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has clarified that re-arrest of an accused is not barred in law, even if a prior arrest was rendered illegal due to procedural lapses, as long as the defects are subsequently cured. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma delivered the ruling while dismissing a batch of petitions filed by several accused persons, who had challenged their re-arrest in an Arms Act case being investigated by Delhi Police's special cell. They had also assailed a trial court order which had upheld the legality of the subsequent arrest. 'It would essentially mean that a serious offender may escape the process of law solely on account of a procedural lapse committed by the investigating agency, even if sufficient material exists justifying his arrest,' the court observed. The petitioners had argued that once the trial court had held their initial arrest invalid, any re-arrest under the same FIR could not be legally sustained. They also asserted that fresh material did not exist to justify their re-arrest and that statutory safeguards had still not been followed. Rejecting these contentions, the court noted that at the time of re-arrest, detailed arrest grounds were furnished to each of the accused, outlining their alleged roles in the organised crime syndicate. 'Therefore, at the time of re-arrest, the mandatory requirements of law, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, were prima facie complied with. Thus, this court is of the opinion that the defect which had vitiated the initial arrest was not repeated during the re-arrest,' the bench held. It added that there is no express provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, or the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which bars such a re-arrest. 'To hold otherwise would amount to laying down a precedent which, in the long run, may prove perilous to the administration of criminal justice. Should the procedural lapse committed by one officer, however serious, be allowed to permanently shield the accused from arrest, even after the defect has been remedied? The answer must be negative,' the court said. The court said that allowing such an argument would effectively grant blanket immunity to accused persons from being arrested in future, even in serious offences, merely because of a previous technical defect.
New Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Despite revision, government staff await hiked allowance
NEW DELHI: Nearly one and a half years after the Centre hiked Dearness Allowance to 50 per cent, government employees are still waiting for the payment of revised allowances for the period from January to June 2024. While civic bodies like the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and New Delhi Municipal Council have already cleared the revised arrears for their employees, city government staff complain that the government is yet to do the same. Employees continue to pursue the matter with their respective department heads, but no clear directive has been issued so far. According to employees and staff unions, all central government ministries, offices, and autonomous bodies across the country have implemented the enhanced allowances effective from January 1, 2024, in line with the Department of Expenditure's order issued on March 12, 2024. 'We have been denied many revised allowances including nursing allowance, dress, hospital patient care, and other DA indexes for one and a half years. Besides, the increased House Rent Allowance is pending for six months,' a government staff member said. 'For the first time in history, the Government of NCT of Delhi appears to be taking independent decisions on matters related to pay and allowances, despite not having the authority to alter such financial provisions,' alleged an official familiar with the issue. Employees have urged the Delhi government to immediately release the pending allowances.
