Gujarat High Court Grants Bail to 33 Migrant Workers, Instates Them as ‘Victims’ and Not ‘Criminals’

Must Read

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi,...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions,...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by...

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour...

Follow us

The Gujarat HC granted bail to the 33 migrant workers arrested on 18.05.2020. The decision comes in the light of several atrocities taking place against migrant workers during the COVID- 19 pandemic.

Brief Facts of the Case 

The applicants were migrant labourers at a construction site in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Out of 33, 32 belonged to the state of Jharkhand and 1 to West Bengal.

The Central Government announced nationwide lockdown from March 2020. However, this left the applicants without any livelihood. 

On 18.05.2020, the workers gathered at the construction site. This was near the New IIM Building at Vastrapur, Ahmedabad. They started demanding food and wages. They also wanted to be sent back to their respective native places.

Soon, a scuffle erupted as the policemen dispersed the crowd. Thereafter, the police detained several migrant workers.

The police charged the migrants under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. They also applied Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act, Section 3 of the Epidemic Act, Section 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act and Section 3(1) and 3(2)(e) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.

Advocate Nirav Mishra represented the applicants in the present matter. 

Procedural History

The pandemic comes as a surprise to the entire world. The sudden imposition of lockdown has created challenging circumstances for all. 

However, the situation has made a more gruesome impact on the daily wage earners. Moreover, the daily wage workers who have migrated from the native places have to face the wrath of the pandemic. With no food and money, the victims may have resorted to unlawful activities.

The Supreme Court has time and again passed directives during the lockdown period. On 26.05.2020, the Apex Court took suo moto cognizance of the pathetic condition of migrant labourers. 

On 09.06.2020, the Supreme Court directed all State Governments and Union Territories to identify and transport stranded migrants to their natives within 15 days.

The Apex Court also ordered retraction of criminal cases against the migrants. They are currently booked for lockdown violations under the Disaster Management Act. This was as they attempted to walk to their villages and formed crowds in public places.

Further, on 19.06.2020, the Supreme Court mandated the directions earlier passed on 09.06.2020. This was for the transportation of the workers to their hometowns within 15 days.

On 12.05.2020, the Gujarat High Court took notice of the stranded migrants. It reminded the State authorities of its paramount duties, which was to ensure dignified living of its citizens. This treatment that the migrants are facing is against Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

The High Court also noted the sufferings and desperation of the migrants. They are the most downtrodden, underprivileged and weaker section of the society. It asserted that they are not afraid of COVID-19 but definitely afraid of death due to starvation.

In light of the above directions and orders, the Court has decided on the present matter.

Court’s Observation

The Court has observed the circumstances of the applicants. They had no means of livelihood. As a result, this had rendered them without any food for days. 

The court asserted

“In the lockdown, when the applicants were without any work, without any money and even without any food and under such circumstances, instead of arranging of their going back home, they are sent to jail. The Applicants are more the victims, certainly not the criminals.”

Court’s Decisions

Justice Paresh Upadhyay pronounced the judgement.

The Court has granted bail to all the 33 migrant workers under Section 439 of IPC. As a result, the applicants are to furnish personal bonds of Rs. 500 each. 


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention order of the husband of...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions, as well as shareholder disputes...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by P. Sankar & V. Sobana....

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour killing against her by her...

Punjab Woman Accuses Punjab Police of Keeping Husband in Illegal Custody and Framing Him in a False Case

In the case of Geeta v the State of Punjab, the petitioner evoked a writ petition of habeas corpus as she claimed that her...

Addition of Words as Prefixes or Suffixes Is an Infringement of a Registered Trademark: Delhi High Court

Justice Jayanth Nath allowed the Times Group to use its registered trademark “Newshour”, in the case of Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd v. ARG Outlier...

Just Because the Deceased Did Not Have License, Does Not Imply He Was Negligent: Chhattisgarh High Court

In the case of Hemlal & Others v. Dayaram & Others, a Single Bench of Chhattisgarh High Court consisting of Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal annunciated various...

Hoardings Are Movable Property Under Section 2(3) of DMC Act Subject To the Twin Test: Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court in the case of Delhi International Airport v South Delhi Metropolitan Corporation discussed in detail the provision under Section 2(3) of the DMC...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -