- (1.) The petitioner, a social activist, in this public interest litigation has prayed for issue of a writ of mandamus to the competent authorities of the States of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu and other authorities, to take preventive and prohibitive measures as there is violence in these States because of an order passed by this Court on 12th September, 2016.
(2.) We are obliged to note here that the petitioner has impleaded the Chief Election Commissioner and the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. As far as the said authorities are concerned, as advised at present, we are not inclined to issue notice.
(3.) Having said that, as submitted by Dr. Adish C. Aggarwala, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, we may refer with profit to a three-Judge Bench judgment rendered in Destruction of Public and Private Properties In Re versus State of Andhra Pradesh and Others (2009) 5 SCC 212. In the said case, the Court was concerned with destruction of public and private properties in the name of agitations, bandhs, hartals and the like. In paragraph 12 of the said judgment, the Court, while addressing the issue pertaining how to effectuate the modalities for preventive action and adding teeth to the enquiry/investigation, issued certain guidelines. The guidelines read as under: "(1) The organiser should meet the police to review and revise the route to be taken and to lay down conditions for a peaceful march or protest; (2) All weapons, including knives, lathis and the like shall be prohibited; (3) An undertaking is to be provided by the organisers to ensure a peaceful march with marshals at each relevant junction; (4) The police and the State Government shall ensure videography of such protests to the maximum extent possible; (5) The person-in-charge to supervise the demonstration shall be SP (if the situation is confined to the district) and the highest police officer in the State, where the situation stretches beyond one district; (6) In the event that demonstrations turn violent, the officer-in-charge shall ensure that the events are videographed through private operators and also request such further information from the media and others on the incidents in question; (7) The police shall immediately inform the State Government with reports on the events, including damage, if any, caused by the police; and (8) The State Government shall prepare a report on the police reports and other information that may be available to it and shall file a petition including its report in the High Court or the Supreme Court as the case may be for the Court in question to take suo motu action." We have referred to the said paragraph as Dr. Aggarwala has referred to the same, as well as to paragraph 15. The fundamental purpose is that there cannot be any agitation when it relates to an order passed by the court. We have already indicated that any grieved party is under an obligation to take recourse to legal remedies for mitigation of grievances. ;