Up to 76 Supreme Court lawyers have sent a letter to the NV Ramana Supreme Court asking them to pay attention to recent hate speeches to the ethnic minority communities of Khalidwar and Delhi. This calls for “ethnic cleansing.”
.” In the
Letter, the lawyer said the statement was not just a hate speech, but an open call for “killing the entire community.” “Therefore, the speech not only poses a serious threat to our country’s unity and integrity but also jeopardizes the lives of millions of Muslim citizens,” the letter said. Attorney
Called on CJI to pay attention to Suomoto, given the seriousness and seriousness of the case. The lawyer said the letter was addressed in the hope that CJI would take immediate action in its position as head of the state’s judiciary. The lawyer mentioned Dharmasansad, which was held in Haridwar’s Vedniketandam in December 1720 and was allegedly containing hate speech to the community.
Calls for ethnic cleansing of Hindus and other religions are being made by Islamic terrorists around the world, including much of India.
76 Supreme Court lawyers wrote a letter highlighting two separate events to be held in Delhi (by Hinduyu Bavahini) and Haridwar (by Yatinal Singanando) on December 17 and 19, 2021. I sent it to Chief Justice of India NV Ramana. In the meantime, a speech of hatred emerged from an open call for mass slaughter against Islam to achieve ethnic cleansing. 76 Supreme Court lawyers urged India’s Supreme Court Secretary NV Ramana to pay attention to the call for “ethnic cleansing” at two recent religious events in Supreme, Delhi, and Haridwar. They wrote that in the absence of police action, “urgent judicial intervention is needed to prevent such incidents that appear to be the order of the day.”
You urged CJI to pay attention to suo moto. A motion was also issued to direct the guilty to take action under Sections 120B, 121A, 124A, 153A, 153B, 295A, and 298 of the Indian Criminal Code of 1860. The
The letter states that the events and speeches held were not just hated speeches, but an open call for the killing of the entire community. In this regard, the lawyer said in a letter that the speech mentioned would not only pose a serious threat to our country’s unity and integrity but would endanger the lives of millions of Muslim citizens. .. “It should be noted that recent speeches are part of a series of similar speeches encountered in the past. It should be noted that no effective measures have been taken under the provisions of IPC 153, 153A, 153B, 295A, 504, 506, 120B, 34 in connection with previous hate speech. We are also informed that under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, there are few petitions pending consideration by the Supreme Court in this regard, “said the letter of December 26, 2021. The letter is addressed with the hope that CJI, as head of the state’s judiciary, knows its commitment to both the independence of the judiciary and the constitutional values underlying the functioning of a multicultural nation.
The letter stated that the events and speeches held were not just hated speeches, but an open call for the killing of the entire community. In this regard, the lawyer said in a letter that the speech mentioned would not only pose a serious threat to our country’s unity and integrity but would endanger the lives of millions of Muslim citizens. .. “It should be noted that recent speeches are part of a series of similar speeches encountered in the past. In connection with previous hate speeches, IPC’s 153, 153A, 153B, 295A, 504, 506. It should be noted that under the provisions of 120B, 34, no effective measures have been taken. A petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is also pending in the Honorable Supreme Court. Said in a letter on December 26, 2014.
Attorneys also hope that CJI, in its position as Chief Justice of the State, recognizes its commitment to both the independence of the judiciary and the constitutional values underlying the functioning of multiculturalism. A country like us that said it was addressed.
Read The Letter
Hon’ble Mr.Justice N.V.Ramana
The Chief Justice of India
Supreme Court of India
Subject – Prayer for taking of Suo Moto Cognizance of hate speeches calling for the genocide of Muslims given in Haridwar and Delhi
This is to bring to your kind notice that between the 17th & 19th of December 2021 at two separate events organized in Delhi (by the Hindu Yuva Vahini) and Haridwar (by Yati Narsinghanand), hate speeches consisting of open calls for genocide of Muslims in order to achieve ethnic cleansing, were made by the following:
1. Yati Narsinghanand Giri
2. 2. Sagar Sindhu Maharaj
3. 3. Dharamdas Maharaj
4. 4. Premanand Maharaj
5. 5. Sadhvi Annapoorna alias Pooja Shakun Pandey
6. 6. Swami Anand Swaroop
7. 7. Ashwani Upadhyay
8. 8. Suresh Chavhanke
9. 9. Swami Prabodhanand Giri
10. The aforementioned events and the speeches delivered during the same are not mere hate speeches but amount to an open call for the murder of an entire community. The said speeches thus, pose a grave threat not just to the unity and integrity of our country but also endanger the lives of millions of Muslim citizens.
In view of the seriousness and gravity of the aforementioned events, it is most humbly prayed that Your Lordship may take suo-moto cognizance of the same and direct that action is taken against the guilty persons under Sections 120B, 121A, 153A, 153B, 295A and 298 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
It is also pointed out that the recent speeches are a part of a series of similar speeches that we have come across in the past. It may be noted that no effective steps have been taken under the provisions of 153, 153A, 153B, 295A, 504, 506, 120B, 34 of IPC in respect of the earlier hate speeches. Thus, urgent judicial intervention is required to prevent such events that seem to have become the order of the day. We have also been informed that in this regard a few Petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India are also pending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
We are writing to your Lordship hoping for prompt action in your capacity as the head of the judicial wing of the State and knowing your Lordship’s commitment to both the independence of the Judiciary as also the constitutional values that are fundamental to the functioning of a multicultural nation such as ours.
1. Anjana Prakash, Sr.Adv. & Former Judge, High Court of Patna
2. 2. Dushyant Dave, Sr.Adv.
3. 3. Salman Khurshid, Sr.Adv.
4. 4. Prashant Bhushan, Adv.
5. 5. Raju Ramachandran, Sr.Adv.
6. 6. Huzefa Ahmadi, Sr.Adv.
7. 7. C.U.Singh, Sr.Adv.
8. 8. Meenakshi Arora, Sr.Adv.
9. 9. Vrinda Grover, Adv.
10. 10.Harin Raval, Sr.Adv. 11.Siddharth Dave, Sr.Adv. 12.Vibha Makhija, Sr.Adv. 13.Kavin Gulati, Sr.Adv. 14.P.V.Surendranath, Sr.Adv. 15.Basavprabhu Patil, Sr.Adv. 16.Ejaz Maqbool, Adv.
17.Amita Joseph, Adv. 18.Shomona Khanna, Adv. 19.Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, Adv. 20.Amit Anand Tiwari, Adv. 21.Shadaan Farasat, Adv. 22.Jagdeep S.Chhokar, Adv. 23.Mohd.Nizamuddin Pasha, Adv. 24.Anuj Prakaash, Adv.
25.Shoeb Alam, Adv. 26.Rajesh Tyagi, Adv.
28.Kabir Dixit, Adv. 29.Aldanish Rein, Adv. 30.Cheryl D’Souza, Adv. 31.Andleeb Naqvi, Adv. 32.Prerna Chaturvedi, Adv. 33.Nanita Sharma, Adv. 34.Payal Gaikwad, Adv. 35.Ritesh Dhar Dubey, Adv. 36.Shahab Ahmad, Adv. 37.Surya Prakash, Adv. 38.Shashankraj Singh, Adv. 39.Priyanka Shukla, Adv. 40.Shalini Gera, Adv. 41.Aditya Shrivastava, Adv. 42.Afreen, Adv.
43.Subhash Chandran KR, Adv. 44.Rauf Rahim, Adv. 45.Kumaresh Trivedi, Adv. 46.Anas Tanwir, Adv.
47.Tahini Bhushan, Adv. 48.Vinayak Pant, Adv.
49.Sitwat Nabi, Adv.
50.Vinayak Pant, Adv. 51.Abhisht Hela, Adv.
52.Syed Jafar Alam, Adv. 53.Chandresan B.Rao, Adv. 54.Aditya Kumar, Adv.
55.Mani Gupta, Adv. 56.Abhishek N.Tripathi, Adv. 57.Purvish Jitendra Malkan, Adv. 58.Harsh Parashar, Adv. 59.Avani Bansal, Adv. 60.Mishika Singh, Adv. 61.Rukhsana Choudhury, Adv. 62.Lara Jeswani, Adv.
63.Kritika Agarwal, Adv.
64.Talha Salaria, Adv.
65.Surya Rajappan, Adv.
66.Naveen Nagarjuna, Adv. 67.Mohtasim Syed, Adv. 68.Bharathimohan, Adv.
69.Neha Rathi, Adv.
70.Anubha Rastogi, Adv.
71.Madhur Bharatiya, Adv. 72.Vertika Mani Tripathi, Adv. 73.Yogmaya M.G., Adv. 74.Chandrachur Bhattacharyya, Adv. 75.Nayantara Roy, Adv.
76.Jayant Tripathi, Adv.
1. News report dated 23.12.2021 published by the Scroll.in titled “Hindutva
2. leaders call for the killing of Muslims at Haridwar and Delhi events”
2. Web-links of video clips of the speeches:
3. o https://www.ndtv.com/video/news/news/viral-hate-speech- videos-from-haridwar-meet-spark-outrage-no-case-yet-613995 (Speeches by Suresh Chavhanke, Yati Narsinghanand, Sadhvi Annapoorna alias Pooja Shakun Pandey, Dharamdas Maharaj, Swami Premanand Maharaj, Swami Prabodhanand)
O https://twitter.com/kaushikrj6/status/1473580908984692736?s= 20 (Speech by Ashwini Upadhyay)
O https://twitter.com/zoo_bear/status/1473689939669921800?s=2 0 (Speech by Yati Narsinghanand)
O https://twitter.com/zoo_bear/status/1473580321429868544 (Speech by Sindhu Sagar Swami)
O https://twitter.com/zoo_bear/status/1473581811548651523?ref_ src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^14 73581811548651523|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=htt ps://publish.twitter.com/?query=https3A2F2 Ftwitter.com2Fzoo_bear2Fstatus2F1473581811548651523widget =Tweet (Speech by Anand Swaroop Maharaj)
The author is a 3rd-semester law student and member of the Student Editorial Board at LRASJ,