‘Vote Chori’: CJI Surya Kant Declines Cong Plea

‘Vote Chori’: CJI Surya Kant Declines Cong Plea

New Delhi Rebuffs UN HR Body’s Contention

The Opposition Congress and Cockroach Janata Party received a big jolt from the Supreme Court after Chief Justice of India Surya Kant rebuffed an appeal for a personal meeting on Monday between him and Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge and party MP Rahul Gandhi.

Not only that, the strict directive from the two-judge bench of the SC to both the Delhi police and protesters earlier to maintain the law and order and ensure peace during any protest rally came as another massive blow to those seeking to disrupt life and traffic in Delhi through day-long protests at Jantar Mantar against ‘vote chori.’

CJI Surya Kant’s detailed response in the email is believed to have taken the wind out of the Opposition’s sail because his categorical reasoning behind his refusal to meet the Kharge-Gandhi-led delegation left the duo rooted to the spot.

That a personal meeting to discuss the issues which have already been pending and are being heard in the Supreme Court, is extremely untenable, has compelled the Congress and CJP leadership to go into a huddle.

Any discussion at the personal level on those issues by these leaders will ‘contravene the iconic principles of separation of power which is part of the basic structure of the Constitution,’ Honourable Justice Surya Kant stated.

Not only that, Justice Kant was believed to have further pointed out that the Supreme Court which has only the power of adjudication under the Constitution, is not empowered or endowed with any administrative authority.

In a veiled yet significant reference to the cases on allegations of ‘vote chori’ being heard in the SC, he said that any recognised political party or any of its leaders has the liberty to approach the court armed with their grievances and the court is bound to adjudicate it.

CJI Surya Kant who made no reference to Mr Kharge’s social media post that he along with Rahul Gandhi would be meeting him between 4 and 5 pm today, only advised the Congress president that he could at best try to ensure expeditious hearing of any petition by the party or its leader on Monday if the same would get filed in due time.

“Chaos is being created in the country by the home minister and PM and an undeclared emergency is imposed,” Kharge alleged in his post.

Order of the Two-Judge SC Bench

The fresh order of the two-judge bench of the SC on the Delhi crackdown might be termed as their victory by the protesters. But a careful analysis of the same would reveal that the law enforcing authorities have not been asked to remain silent spectators if the situation poses a threat to the law and order.  

While the order has stated that peaceful, unarmed gathering cannot face detention and no one can be illegally detained, the protesters must follow the rules and ensure the protest remains peaceful. Police can take action if the law and order and peace are threatened, the judges said.

While freedom of movement of peace-loving people has to be ensured, the SC bench ordered immediate restoration of Metro and rail service besides internet.

One point is absolutely clear: no breach of peace and any misuse of these services will be allowed; and in the event of a breach, cops have the responsibility to restore order.

The bench, it is learnt, will be hearing this afternoon the petition of an alleged detention of 6000 protesters at various detention centres spread across Delhi.

Meanwhile, in another significant development, New Delhi has summarily rejected in a bold and critical manner the United Nation’s latest statement on mass detention of protesters in Delhi.

"We also note that the OHCHR has an approach of extreme selectivity when it comes to public positions," the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said in its response.

"Violent responses to protests in our neighbourhood have gone uncommented, as indeed have law enforcement actions in its own vicinity. Such double standards only erode the credibility of its standing and contribute to the loss of faith in multilateralism," the MEA added while rejecting the contention of the UN Human Rights body.