Gujarat HC Seeks State's Response On Plea Seeking Permission To Hold 'Peaceful Protest' Against Waqf Amendment, UCC

The Gujarat High Court on Friday (April 11) asked the State to get instructions on a plea challenging a decision by Palanpur's Sub-Divisional Magistrate refusing permission to the Convenor of a Muslim body to hold "peaceful protest" against the Waqf Amendment Bill–which came into effect as law on April 8, and the Uniform Civil Code.

When the matter was taken up on April 21, after some hearing, the counsel for petitioner submitted that he maybe permitted to withdraw the plea with a liberty to file fresh application before the SDM seeking permission. The counsel said that this fresh application may be decided expeditiously. The counsel appearing for respondent authorities advocate GH Virk said that if fresh application is submitted by the petitioner it will be decided expeditiously on its merits. "Considering the submissions permission to withdraw special civil application is granted with the aforesaid liberty," the court said. 

The plea seeks a direction to quash and set aside the Sub divisional magistrate's decision refusing permission to hold the protest and a further direction to the respondent to grant permission to hold a "peaceful protest and silent rally on April 15". In the meanwhile, the plea seeks, that pending final adjudication of the petition, interim direction be given to the respondent authority to grant permission to the petitioner to hold peaceful protest and silent rally on April 15. 

During the hearing on April 11, the counsel for the petitioner–Convener of Rashtriya Muslim Adhikar Manch submitted before Justice Aniruddha P Mayee that initially the peaceful protest/rally was proposed for April 7. It was thereafter rescheduled to April 15 since decision was not taken on the petitioner's permission request, he said. 

At this stage the court orally said, "That can be rescheduled again. It is only a protest which you are trying to show. So that can be rescheduled. What is the urgency?...Now it is an (Waqf) Act now. From April 8 it is an Act now". 

The counsel meanwhile argued, that it was the petitioner's fundamental right to organize a peaceful protest. 

"Nobody is saying no. But what is the urgency in that," the court orally asked. 

To this the counsel said, "Our date is April 15. For that we have sought circulation today itself"

The court thereafter orally said, "You give your representation necessary for that. For this rally. What is the purpose? You have not stated any purpose. You want to take it out in opposition of something. Okay you take out no problem". 

The counsel said that the permission was sought for a protest of "200-300 persons", who were to march from a particular place upto collector's office. 

At this stage the court orally said, "Problem is not that. Problem is does the organizer undertake that there will be no violence or something like that? That is what I'm asking. I have gone through the letter...Whoever has made the application, can they guarantee there will be no law and order situation?...Because this particular communication says that law and order problem can be there". 

The counsel however argued, "Law and order on what basis have they come to that conclusion? The opinion is sought from Palanpur police station that opinion is not made available to us...that what apprehension they have regarding law and order situation. Unless and until that communication is communicated..."

The court thereafter asked the State's counsel to take instructions in the matter and orally said, "You take instruction whatever is there.  Ultimately if they want to hold a rally they can hold it later on also". 

The State's counsel submitted that "subjective satisfaction of local law enforcement" is to be taken out. 

The matter is next listed on April 21. 

Case title: SAJIDBHAI MUHAMMEDBHAI MAKRANI v/s SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, PALANPUR and others