Upa Amendment Hearing Update; CJI Sanjiv Khanna | Supreme Court | The Supreme Court denied hearing on UAPA: said- We cannot be the first example for this, Delhi High Court should hear

Upa Amendment Hearing Update; CJI Sanjiv Khanna | Supreme Court | The Supreme Court denied hearing on UAPA: said- We cannot be the first example for this, Delhi High Court should hear

New DelhiA few moments ago

  • Copy link

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to hear the petitions against the amendment in the UAPA provisions. A bench of CJI Sanjeev Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Vishwanathan has asked the Delhi High Court to hear the case.

The bench said- We cannot be the first court (example) for hearing. Many troubles come out. Sometimes issues are released by your side (petitioner), sometimes left by their side (union). Then we have to refer the big bench. First the High Court should decide on this.

The Supreme Court on 6 September 2019 issued a notice to the Center on petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the 2019 amendment in the illegal activity (prevention) Act (UAPA). The bench had said that other High Courts of the country can also investigate new petitions against UAPA amendments.

The court heard the petitions filed by Sajal Jain and Amitabh Pandey of the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR). In fact, under the amendment in the provisions of UAPA, the state government has been empowered to declare any person to be terrorists and confiscate his property.

Court Room Live …

CJI- Complex legal issues often appear in such cases. It would be right for the High Court to investigate it.

Petitioner- Arrange the Supreme Court to hear the case. He also said that he had issued a notice 5 years ago. Instead of disposing of the petitions, the case can be transferred to the Delhi High Court, as it has several difficulties for the petitioners, many of which are retired bureaucrats. In our case we are all retired bureaucrats. We have filed a petition in the Supreme Court and it will be inconvenient for us to get representation in many High Courts.

CJI-argument accepted the plea, the petitions will be listed in the Delhi High Court.

Petitioner- The amended provisions violate the right to life and freedom in addition to the right to equality of citizens such as equality, speaking and expression.

UAPA 2019 gives the government the right to impose indirect restrictions on the right to disagreement under the guise of curbing terrorism. Which is dangerous for developing democratic society.

There are more news …

Source link