Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

What did the court say

  • A Bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and M R Shah advised the petitioner, who dropped the case, that if he didn't like Toolkit, he should ignore it.
  • The Bench informed attorney Shashank Shekhar Jha, who filed the case, that this is political propaganda and that if he doesn't like it, he should disregard it.
  • The Bench stated that India is a democracy and that such a remedy in a petition under Article 32 cannot be given. Why should we provide directions under 32 in a petition? In criminal law, people have redress.
  • The Bench advised the petitioner that he may withdraw it and explore his alternative options.

What was the case

  • The BJP has previously accused the Congress of developing a "toolkit" for tarnishing the country's and Prime Minister's image over the handling of the COVID-19 epidemic.
  • The Congress, on the other hand, has rejected the accusation, and one of its leaders has filed a police complaint in this city, alleging that the BJP is spreading a "false toolkit" to discredit their party.
  • Jha further asked the Supreme Court to urge the Election Commission of India to terminate the Congress party's registration if they are found to be doing suspected anti-national activities and meddling in the lives of ordinary people.

Legal Background

  • Individuals have the right under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution to petition the Supreme Court for justice if they believe their rights have been "unduly deprived."
  • During the video conference hearing, the petitioner mentioned one of the prayers in his petition, which asked the Supreme Court to direct the Centre to issue guidelines to political parties, groups, and individuals to stop all types of hoardings and portraying alleged anti-national stances, such as using photos of funerals and dead bodies, naming mutants after India, and so on.
  • The petitioner claimed that the "toolkit" contained communal propaganda in the form of words like ‘Indian strain' (Delta variation) and communalized Hindus, he said, adding that terms like “Singapore strain” have also been prohibited in Singapore.
"Loved reading this piece by Dhyan Shah?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"




Tags :

  Views  40  Report



Comments
img