2018 (7) TMI 1993 - SC - Indian Laws

Action against the cow protection groups indulging in violence - Constitutional validity of Section 12 of the Gujarat Animal Prevention Act, 1954, Section 13 of the Maharashtra Animal Prevention Act, 1976 and Section 15 of the Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Cattle Preservation Act, 1964 - HELD THAT - There is no dispute that the act of lynching is unlawful but we are not concerned with any specific case since it has become a sweeping phenomenon with a far-reaching impact. It is our constitutional duty to take a call to protect lives and human rights. There cannot be a right higher than the right to live with dignity and further to be treated with humanness that the law provides. What the law provides may be taken away by lawful means; that is the fundamental concept of law. No one is entitled to shake the said foundation. No citizen can assault the human dignity of another, for such an action would comatose the majesty of law. In a civilized society, it is the fear of law that prevents crimes. When the preventive measures face failure, the crime takes place and then there have to be remedial and punitive measures. Steps to be taken at every stage for implementation of law are extremely important. Hence, the guidelines are necessary to be prescribed. Necessary guidelines is prescribed - Let the matters be listed on 20th August, 2018 for further directions.

Issues Involved:
1. Cow vigilantism and mob violence
2. Duty of the State and Central Governments
3. Preventive, remedial, and punitive measures
4. Legal framework and enforcement
5. Protection of victims and witnesses
6. Role of law enforcement agencies
7. Judicial guidelines and recommendations

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Cow Vigilantism and Mob Violence:
The judgment addresses the critical issue of cow vigilantism and related mob violence, emphasizing that no individual or group has the right to take the law into their own hands. The court underscores that such actions are contrary to the principles of a civilized society and the rule of law, highlighting that vigilantism undermines legal and formal institutions and leads to anarchy and chaos.

2. Duty of the State and Central Governments:
The court reiterates the responsibility of the State and Central Governments to prevent and address incidents of mob violence and lynching. It emphasizes that law enforcement agencies must act to prevent such crimes and ensure that perpetrators are brought to justice. The judgment also calls for the Central Government to issue directions to State Governments under Articles 256 and 257 of the Constitution to maintain law and order.

3. Preventive, Remedial, and Punitive Measures:
The judgment outlines comprehensive guidelines for preventive, remedial, and punitive measures to address mob violence and lynching:
- Preventive Measures: Designation of senior police officers as Nodal Officers in each district, identification of sensitive areas, regular meetings with intelligence units, and public awareness campaigns.
- Remedial Measures: Immediate registration of FIRs, monitoring of investigations, victim compensation schemes, and fast-track courts for trial of such cases.
- Punitive Measures: Disciplinary action against officials failing to comply with directives, and strict punishment for perpetrators.

4. Legal Framework and Enforcement:
The judgment stresses the need for a robust legal framework to address mob violence and lynching. It recommends the creation of a separate offense for lynching with adequate punishment to instill fear of law among potential offenders. The court highlights that the existing legal provisions must be enforced rigorously to prevent such crimes.

5. Protection of Victims and Witnesses:
The court emphasizes the importance of protecting victims and witnesses of mob violence and lynching. It mandates timely notice of court proceedings to victims, provision of free legal aid, and measures to conceal the identity and address of witnesses to ensure their safety.

6. Role of Law Enforcement Agencies:
The judgment underscores the critical role of law enforcement agencies in preventing and addressing mob violence. It directs police officers to disperse mobs, register FIRs promptly, and ensure effective investigation and prosecution of offenders. The court also mandates regular patrolling in sensitive areas and strict action against officers failing to perform their duties.

7. Judicial Guidelines and Recommendations:
The court issues detailed guidelines for the prevention, investigation, and trial of mob violence cases. It also recommends legislative action to create a specific offense for lynching. The judgment calls for a coordinated effort by the Central and State Governments to implement these guidelines and protect the constitutional rights of citizens.

Conclusion:
The judgment provides a comprehensive framework to address the menace of cow vigilantism and mob violence. It emphasizes the rule of law, the duty of the State and Central Governments, and the need for preventive, remedial, and punitive measures. The court's guidelines aim to ensure the protection of victims and witnesses, effective law enforcement, and the creation of a legal framework to deter such crimes. The judgment underscores the importance of maintaining law and order to preserve the secular and pluralistic fabric of Indian society.

← Previous Next →