Read Time: 07 minutes

Hearing a petition seeking investigation into alleged inaction of Tripura police during the communal violence that ensued inside the state last October, the Supreme Court today directed the petitioners to approach the Tripura High Court instead.

The bench of Justices Chandrachud and Surya Kant was apprised that the Tripura High Court has initiated a suo moto proceedings in this regard, therefore, the petitioners have been granted the liberty to intervene in the ongoing proceedings before the high court.

Justice Chandrachud remarked, “If the HC is seized of the matter, our taking up the matter now would amount to expression of no confidence in the High Court.”

However, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the high court is only considering pleas pertaining to compensation and not on the inaction by the police and government.

He further said “They (the government) has started targeting people who have exposed this violence. They have filed status report before HC in which they have been denying these incidents. The CM still says no Mosque was burnt, he says it was a natural reaction.”

He argued that the high court is not going into the question of the lapses of the state functioning and is only going into the compensation to the victims.

Justice Chandrachud, at this point, remarked “The proceedings before the High Court are Suo Motto, they are dealing with some aspects. We will give you permission and intervene and assist the HC including the aspects being raised here.”

Thereafter, Bhushan requested the court to direct Tripura Police not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner and further sought direction of the court to expedite the hearing of this matter in high court.

The court, on hearing the submissions, noted that the division bench of the Tripura High Court headed by the Chief Justice has initiated  Suo Motto proceedings under Article 226 of the constitution.

The court further noted that the high court is evidently seized of the Suo Motto proceedings and having regard to this position, it would be appropriate that the issues sought to be highlighted in the Supreme Court be raised before High Court.

The court further directed that “In view of the apprehension raised by the petitioners to appear physically before the court, we permit the petitioner to make a request before the HC to be allowed to make submission through VC.”

Lastly, the court directed the Tripura police not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners in the event they appear physically. The court also directed the Tripura High Court to expeditiously decide the matter.

The petition was filed by Advocate Ehtesham Hashmi through Advocate Prashant Bhushan stating that no arrests have been made by the police of persons who were responsible for desecrating mosques or vandalising shops and delivering hate speeches targeting the Muslim community.

When the matter came up for hearing in January, Bhushan commented on the reply affidavit filed by Tripura remarking "This reply seems like a news channel whataboutery, It is totally unbecoming of a State to involve in such whataboutery.”

Case title: Ehtesham Hashmi Vs. Union of India & Ors