The petition alleged the violation of human rights of the farmers by the authorities.
On Monday (4th March), The Supreme Court refused to entertain PIL filed for publicity. “Do your own research, these are complex issues” said the Bench to the counsel and allowed him to withdraw the petition.
The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan allowed to withdraw and amend the petition filed by Agnostos Theos the Managing Director of the Sikh Chamber of Commerce under the article 32 and article 19 (1)(d) of the constitution. He claimed the violation of rights of the farmers by the Center and States.
The court suggested the petitioner to abide by the High court where the matter is already pending consideration and bring such cases to SC only for “publicity purposes”.
Several farmer unions called for protests for their demands. Their demand includes a list on 23 crops that the government would buy at a minimum guaranteed price. MSP is the cost at which the government purchases crops from the farmers. It is the minimum assured income of the farmers for their crops amid market uncertainties. The farmer’s demand is to fix MSP at least 50 percent higher than the cost of production of any crop. They also demand the implementation of the Swaminathan committee’s recommendation.
Filed under the article 32 of the constitution, the plea claimed that while farmers have been peacefully protesting for their demands, the authorities used threats and excessive powers, shutdown the internet and fortified Delhi borders “creating hostile and violent situations against its own peaceful citizens.”
Farmers have been detained aggressively from entering Delhi. The negotiations between the government and the farmers have come to a standstill since the authorities have blocked roadways with metal containers, cement blocks, and barbed wires. The plea claimed that the restriction of the farmers from entering the National Capital violates their right to travel freely throughout the country as enshrined under Article 19 (1)(d) of the constitution.
“The Union and State governments, in anticipation of the protest by the farmer, issued threats against the people in participating in the protest, fortified the borders of the state around the city of Delhi, with iron spikes, concrete walls, etc ensuring that farmers are not able to enter territory of the national capital,” it said.
States of Haryana, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and NCT of Delhi have been held accountable in this case as the plea alleged that the government of these states exerted “aggressive and violent measures” against the “peacefully protesting” farmers causing them severe injuries.
The petitioners sought a direction to authorities to not cause hindrance in “peaceful protest” of the farmers. A direction to the National Human Rights Commission to scrutinize on alleged violation of human rights of protestors by the authorities and a direction to authorities to take action against those spreading rumours, hurling abuses and threats to defame farmers and Sikh.
It sought directions to ensure “fair and respectful treatment of the protesting farmers”, beside allowing free movement.
Before passing the order to withdraw the petition, Justice Kant expressed hesitancy about the manner in which the petition has been filed and said, “You don’t file petition on the basis of news items. These are very serious issues, and you should do your own research.”
