Madhya Pradesh HC Reprimands Executive Authorities for Not Preventing Public Gatherings Amid Pandemic

Must Read

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court,...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first...

Delhi High Court Seeks Response From Centre, RBI in PIL to Regulate Online Lending Platforms

A notice had been issued by the Delhi HC in a PIL that sought regulation of online lending platforms...

“Consensual Affair” Cannot Be Defence Against the Charge of Kidnapping of the Minor, Sentence Reduced in View of Age Difference: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the appeal against the conviction under the charges of kidnapping and discussed whether the punishment was...

Follow us

The Madhya Pradesh High Court had been apprised about the failure of the executive authorities to prevent mass gatherings. A joint report of amicus curiae corroborated the omission of authorities that violated the Covid-19 protocols. The State was ordered to file a response before the Court adjudicated the matter in the next hearing.

Brief Facts

The State of Madhya Pradesh shall be conducting a by-poll for the vacant seats of the legislative assembly in November. Hence, a political congregation was held in Gwalior which was attended by a large number of people. Therefore, a Petition was filed seeking restrictions on events being organized by political parties in the State. The Plea also cited the Latin maxim- “Be ever so high, the Law is above you” to remind the executive authorities of their functions and duties. 

Therefore, the amicus curiae of the High Court submitted a joint report stating that the event was in breach of the prohibitive Orders issued owing to the pandemic. The Orders of Central Government, State Government and the District Magistrate regulated organization of any such congregations.

Court’s Observations

The Court noted the executive authorities’ omission of duty in adherence to the prohibitive Orders of the Government and the District Magistrate. It observed that any executive instruction demands respect and obedience from the political functionaries and head of the State as much as it is expected from a common man. Further, the Court remarked that if executive authorities failed to prevent gatherings in violation of the Orders, the Court would take necessary actions in interests of the public at large. 

The Court also perused the documents regarding the COVID-19 situation in the State. As an interim measure, it directed the political and State functionaries to restrict public gatherings and abide by the prescribed protocol. Moreover, the Court commented on the submissions made by the Additional Advocate General. The attorney cited recent Supreme Court judgement dismissing a Petition seeking postponement of the Bihar State elections. The Court directed the State to produce the aforesaid Order of the Apex Court. 

Furthermore, it was considered to be appropriate to summon the District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police of five districts of the State. The Court intended to ascertain the practical difficulties faced by the authorities. It strongly asserted that:

“The Court must be apprised as to whether the failure to ensure strict implementation of the precautionary guidelines is intentional or for reasons beyond the control of the executive authorities.”

Court’s Order

The Order was passed by a Division Bench at Gwalior consisting of Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Rajeev Srivastava. It sought response from the State replying to the joint report of the amicus curiaeFurther, it directed the political and State functionaries to regulate congregations which could potentially act as a hotspot to the COVID-19 spread.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to 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

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being imposed.  Brief facts of the case This...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.  Brief facts of the...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court, Bhuj in the case of...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first consignment, on 10.06.2020 and the,...

Delhi High Court Seeks Response From Centre, RBI in PIL to Regulate Online Lending Platforms

A notice had been issued by the Delhi HC in a PIL that sought regulation of online lending platforms (Dharanidhar Karimojji vs UOI). Brief Facts: The...

“Consensual Affair” Cannot Be Defence Against the Charge of Kidnapping of the Minor, Sentence Reduced in View of Age Difference: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the appeal against the conviction under the charges of kidnapping and discussed whether the punishment was to be enhanced or not.   Brief...

Delhi HC to Municipal Corp: Paucity of Funds Not an Excuse for Non-Payment of Salaries and Pensions

The Delhi High Court ruled that the paucity of funds cannot be an excuse and pulled up municipal corporations for not paying salaries and pensions to their employees as the right to receive payment is a fundamental right guaranteed in our constitution.

US Supreme Court Reinstates Restriction on Abortion Pills

The Supreme Court of the United States granted the Trump administration’s request to reinstate federal rules requiring women to make in-person visits to hospitals...

Supreme Court Upheld “Environmental Rule of Law” in NGT Decision to Demolish Illegal Hotel on Forest Land

This case concerns the dispute relating to the additional construction of hotel-cum-restaurant structure in the Bus Stand Complex along with a bus stand and...

UK Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Policyholders in the COVID-19 Business Interruption Case

The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court finally concluded the long-awaited COVID-19 business interruption case brought by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Hiscox Action...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -