Plea to Constitute a Committee for the Prevention of Communalism Within the Police Force in Madhya Pradesh High Court

Must Read

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract....

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board...

Follow us

The writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In this case, the petitioner, Mr. Deepak Bundela has alleged that the police personnel practice communalism.

Brief Facts of the Case

The petitioner is from Betul District, Madhya Pradesh. He refers to the incident on March 23, 2020. On the said day, the Executive Magistrate imposed Section 144 owing to COVID- 19. The petitioner was on his way to the hospital when the incident occurred. The police personnel, Mr Kapil Saurashtra thrashed him. Moreover, the police acted on the strength of Section 144. This happened despite the petitioner stating medical reasons.

Moreover, the petitioner asserted intricacies of law and the constitutional limits. But, as stated in the petition, the respondent started verbal abuse. The abuse was on the petition and the constitution. The respondent inflicted physical harm and the petitioner suffered serious injuries.

Furthermore, the petitioner filed a written complaint with the Superintendent of Police. The complaint was to apprise him of the cognizable offence. Then on 17.05.2020, two police officials visited the petitioner for recording the statement. The petitioner alleges that the officials instead tried manipulating to retract the complaint. The official pleaded that the personnel mistook him as a Muslim due to his appearance.

Hence, the petitioner seeks appropriate action to prevent communalism within the executive forces.

Contentions of the Petitioner

The petition contained that the respondent did not register any case despite the cognizable offence. It has evaded the mandate of law and omitted the executive duty. This attracts the provisions of Section 154 of the Code. Further, the police have the duty to uphold constitutional values. It must not transgress the constitution in any circumstance. Also, the state cannot misuse the statutory powers at its disposal.

The petitioner alleges the police with a prejudice against Muslims and their religion. It was the petitioner’s appearance (sporting a long beard). The police catered to their malice towards Muslims rather than its duty. Moreover, the state violated his right to live and have a healthy life. Though Section 144 was in force, there was no restriction on the individual movement and essential supplies.

The Court referred to the Supreme Court guidelines in Prakash Singh & Ors. v. Union Of India and Ors (Police Reforms Case). There has been growing incidents of police brutality in the country and communal elements are one of them.

The plea also quotes the lines of investigating officer. It states- “All those people are ashamed that they did something like this to a Hindu brother without knowing his identity. We do not have any enmity against you. Whenever there is a Hindu-Muslim riot, police always support the Hindus; even Muslims know this. But whatever happened with you was because of ignorance. For that, I have no words.”

Hence, the petitioner seeks directions to mitigate the situation.

Prayer for Relief

The petitioner seeks directions from the Court to mitigate social evil. The incident reflects communalism within the police. The executive must guard the principle of the constitution. The action violates Article 15(1) of the Constitution.

The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.”

The respondents have also constituted offences under Sections 323, 324, 341, 293 and 506 of IPC. The petition pleads for the following relief-

  1. The respondents must register the First Information Report and conduct an adequate inquiry.
  2. The petitioner and his counsel may receive police protection.
  3. The petitioner may receive damages and the cost of litigation.
  4. The Court must constitute a committee to address the concern of communalism in the police force.

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.

Latest News

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board & Anr., via video-conferencing. Deeming the...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish Bisht & Anr. v. State...

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Against National Stock Exchange For Lack Of Merit

In the case of A. Kumar v. Financial Intelligence Unit & Ors., A. Kumar filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution...

The Federal Appeals Court Holds Trump’s Diversion of Military Funds To Build the Wall To Be Unlawful

The Federal Appeals Court held that US President Donald Trump’s diversion of military funds to build the wall is unlawful. A grey area in the...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -