Table of Contents
Context: The Supreme Court has disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought action against incidents of mob lynching and cow vigilantism.
Key Observations by the Supreme Court
- SC observed that the matter had already been addressed in the 2018 case Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Union of India.
- The court emphasized that directions issued in the Tehseen Poonawalla case are binding on all authorities under Article 141 of the Constitution.
- SC stated that monitoring incidents of lynching and vigilantism across states from Delhi would be impractical.
Directions issued by SC in Tehseen S. Poonawalla Case (2018)
Preventive Measures
- All states were directed to appoint a senior police officer as a nodal officer in each district to prevent mob lynching incidents.
- States are required to identify areas where lynching and cow vigilantism were prevalent and increase police patrolling in those regions.
- The Supreme Court instructed social media platforms to curb hate speech and fake news that could incite mob violence.
Punitive Measures
- Fast-track courts are to be set up in each district to handle lynching cases with priority.
- The guilty should be punished with strict penalties, including life imprisonment for lynching-related crimes.
Compensation to Victims
- The Supreme Court directed states to develop a compensation scheme for victims of mob violence.
- Compensation was to be determined based on the severity of injury, loss of livelihood and medical expenses.
Accountability of Government Officials
- Government officials to be held accountable for negligence in preventing lynching cases.
- States to take action against officials who failed to enforce law and order in mob violence cases.
Legislative Measures
- The Supreme Court urged Parliament to consider enacting a separate law against lynching to strengthen legal provisions.
- Following this, some states like Rajasthan and Manipur enacted anti-lynching laws, but a national law is still pending.