The Supreme Court has a host of cases, most importantly regarding the right to personal and civil liberties of journalist Siddique Kappan, activists Gautam Navlakha and Teesta Setalvad, and the long-pending appeals filed by students against the Karnataka hijab ban, lined up in the first working week of its new ‘master of roster’, Chief Justice U.U. Lalit.
A Bench of Chief Justice Lalit and S. Ravindra Bhat is scheduled to hear Mr. Kappan’s plea for bail on August 29.
The Kerala journalist, represented by advocate Haris Beeran, said he has already spent two years behind bars on “trumped-up charges” merely due to his zest to discharge his professional duty to report on the “infamous case” of the alleged rape and murder of a Dalit girl at Hathras in Uttar Pradesh in 2020.
Mr. Kappan is booked under the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). He was picked up while en route to Hathras on October 5, 2020.
The same Bench is also hearing an appeal filed by activist Gautam Navlakha, an accused in the Bhima Koregaon case, against a Bombay High Court decision to reject his request to be shifted from Taloja jail and be placed under house arrest.
Chief Justice Lalit’s Bench is also scheduled to take up a plea for bail filed by activist Teesta Setalvad on August 30. Ms. Setalvad is accused of fabricating evidence to frame high functionaries of the Gujarat Government in a case related to the 2002 riots.
The Gujarat government had on August 25 sought to downplay the urgency of the case, saying there was nothing “special” about it. Justice Lalit, who was sworn in as CJI on Saturday, retorted that though there may not be anything “special” in Ms. Setalvad’s case, the court would still have to consider and test whether her incarceration was necessary at all. The prompt listing of these cases on Chief Justice Lalit’s first week as top judge has gained public notice amidst cynicism about the court’s role in protecting civil liberties.
Fathima Bushra, a student of a Government Pre-University College in Karnataka, will also get a hearing after months of delay. Her petition challenging her “debarment” from attending regular classes for wearing the hijab was never listed for hearing despite repeated oral mentions through April, May and even in July by various lawyers, including Kapil Sibal, senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, and advocate Prashant Bhushan. Curiously, the court had promised to list the case but had never got around to doing it.
Ms. Bushra’s petition, listed before a Bench led by Justice Hemant Gupta, has raised pertinent questions on the “essential” religious practices of Muslims, who constitute 18% of the population. She has argued that the row over the hijab should not be seen by the court as a solitary incident but “the latest in a long line of events that have threatened the secular fabric of our society and polity, a number of which are sub-judice before the Supreme Court and other courts in the country”.
“These events include the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019… violence and riots targeting those protesting against the Act, virulent protests against Muslims, who on account of lack of adequate mosques in Gurugram, were offering prayers in open areas duly demarcated by the government/authorities for this purpose, cow vigilantism, laws effectively prohibiting religious conversion, and blatant calls for economic boycott and even genocide against the Muslims of the country in events self-styled as ‘Dharam Sansads’,” Ms. Bushra has said in her petition.
