NEW DELHI: Political storm raised over the attack on north Indians in Maharashtra has taken a turn beyond rhetoric with the Supreme Court issuing a notice yesterday to the state government on protection of non-Marathis in the state.
In response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking protection for non-Marathis in Maharashtra, the Supreme Court has asked the Vilasrao Deshmukh government about the steps it has taken to protect life and property of people from outside the state. In its notice, the Supreme Court has given Maharashtra government four weeks to respond.
The apex court bench headed by Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan has asked the state government’s reply on allegations about it having failed to check violence.
The Supreme Court took this decision in response to a petition filed by Salek Chand Jain. While admitting the petition last week, the apex court had observed: “It is a political matter and intervention by the court would not help.”
The bench had also criticized the government for lacking the will to tackle unabated attacks being carried out against north Indians by activists of Maharashtra Navnirman Sena led by Raj Thackeray.
The apex court sought the Maharashtra government’s response after advocate Sugrive Dubey alleged that the state police had remained a mute spectator to two north Indian doctor brothers — Ajay Dubey, 35, and Vijay, 33 — being killed by MNS activists.
During the PIL’s hearing, reference was also made to Article 355 of the Indian Constitution, according to which: “It shall be the duty of the union to protect every state against external aggression and internal disturbance and to ensure that the government of every state is carried on in accordance with the provisions of this constitution.”
The petitioner alleged that north Indians are unsafe in Maharashtra and that state government was not taking any action to protect them. The petition cited the instance of north Indian students, who had gone to Mumbai for a railway department selection test on Oct. 18, being beaten up by MNS activists while the police remained a silent spectator.
The petitioner argued that such regional and divisive forces posed a grave threat to national security and integrity. The petitioner also claimed that attack on north Indians in Maharashtra leading to a chain reaction elsewhere in the country threatened to destroy the nation’s unity and integrity.
In a situation like that of Maharashtra, the center should intervene according to the PIL. The bench did not issue any notice to Home Ministry though the petitioner argued that despite there being a constitutional crisis in Maharashtra, the center did not give necessary instructions to the state government.
The apex court dismissed the petitioner’s demand for a judicial probe into killing of Rahul Raj, who was shot dead in a police “encounter,” after he allegedly took a bus hostage on gunpoint on Oct. 27. A day later, Dharam Dev Rai of Uttar Pradesh was beaten to death in a suburban train near Mumbai. Citing these cases, the petitioner alleged that there was total failure of constitutional machinery in Maharashtra.
Blaming MNS and its chief for these attacks, the petitioner pleaded for cancellation of bail granted earlier to Raj. He should be prosecuted under the National Security Act, the petitioner argued.
