Table of Contents
Delhi HC dismisses PIL petition against Centre’s decision to observe June 25 as ‘Samvidhan Hatya Diwas’
Petitioner objects to use of ‘hatya’; court says Centre’s move does not undermine or disrespect Constitution
A view of Delhi High Court, in New Delhi.
| Photo Credit: SUSHIL KUMAR VERMA
The Delhi High Court on July 26 dismissed a petition challenging the Centre’s decision to observe June 25, the day the Emergency was imposed in 1975, as ‘Samvidhan Hatya Diwas’.
The High Court rejected the petitioner’s contention that the decision was not only in violation of the Constitution but was also an “insult” as it used the word “hatya” (murder) with “Samvidhan” (Constitution), which is a “living document”.
The High Court said the Centre’s July 12 notification was not against the proclamation of Emergency but against the abuse of power, misuse of law and the excesses that followed, and was therefore not in violation of the Constitution or law.
‘Derogatory move’
Petitioner Samir Mailk’s counsel argued that the Emergency was declared in 1975 as per Article 352 of the Constitution of India, and the decision to declare the day of the proclamation as ‘Samvidhan Hatya Diwas’ was derogatory and contrary to the constitutional provisions.
The plea argued that the Constitution is a “living document” which cannot die. It said ‘Samvidhan Hatya Diwas’ would also violate the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act.
The High Court, however, rejected the plea said: “The court finds that the notification does not challenge the issue of proclamation of Emergency… and the Constitution, but the abuse of power, misuse of provisions and the excesses. It is in that context that ‘hatya’ is used”.
“It in no way undermines or disrespects the Constitution,” the High Court said adding that even the phrase “murder of democracy” was often used, and the petition was not worth consideration.
The petition said that under the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, showing disrespect to the Constitution was an offence, and even the government cannot be permitted to use “offending language” in relation to the Constitution for their personal and political purposes.
The plea said the notification does not disclose under which law or regulation it was issued.
The notification, it said, is also not in compliance with Article 77 of the Constitution of India, which mandates that all executive actions of the government shall be taken in the name of the President.
Read Comments
- Copy link
- Telegram
READ LATER
Remove
SEE ALL
PRINT
Related Topics
court administration