The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Central government why didn’t it want to keep the new farm laws in abeyance and not implement it for the time being. Later during the hearing, Chief Justice S.A. Bobde said the Court will break the atmosphere which is jarring for everyone. “Let the legislation be stayed and then the committee can take charge. Who is going to be responsible if this situation gets worse and results in an unwarranted situation?” asked the CJI.
The bench of Chief Justice Bobde, Justices A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian was hearing the batch of petitions challenging the Centre’s three farm laws passed in September 2020.
“There is not a single petition which talks about the beneficial aspect of the law. People are suffering in the cold, there have been suicides. We are proposing constitution of a committee. We understand from the newspapers that talks are going on because the government wants to discuss point by point law. We have a suggestion that after the implementation of the laws have been stayed, the farmers can be asked whether they want to protest at the same site of move somewhere else. We are not going to ask the protesters to stop protesting,”
the Chief Justice said.
The bench said it is extremely disappointed with the government in the manner it is handling the matter. “The whole country is in rebellion against the law and the government is saying that is talking about settlement. It will not help the government when it says that some other state had started. What negotiations are you talking about, nothing is happening,” CJI Bobde said. Advocate General K.K. Venugopal said the government had tried settlement but the parties have rejected the offer.
“This is a very delicate situation and you come here saying that the court pass order in this. Our purpose is to bring about an amicable solution. We asked you to put your law on hold and there is no reply on it. If you have some sense of responsibility and say that you don’t insist on implementing the law, then we can ask the farmers for negotiation. Why there should be an insistence on implementation of a law at any cost,”
asked CJI Bobde.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the government said that rest of the country has started implementing the laws and the rest of the farmers have no objection with the new laws. Replying to Mehta, CJI Bobde said the Court doesn’t want to get into this.
This is when the Chief Justice wondered why the government doesn’t keep the law in abeyance and not implement it for the time being.
CJI Bobde clarified later we want to make it clear that if anything goes wrong we all will be responsible for it. Senior Advocate Harish Salve said assuming that the court grants a stay on the law then the protesters should not be allowed to protest because the large gathering is creating inconvenience. The CJI replied everything can’t be achieved in a day. “We want to ensure no violence or bloodbath in the streets.”
We are not going to stay a 1955 amendment. Your plea will be heard at a later stage, the CJI said to ML Sharma, who made submissions on the incompetency of legislature to pass a law after 1955 amendment.
The CJI said, at the moment, the court is not able to undertake Sharma’s arguments but ensures that he will be heard at a length later.
AG Venugopal then said the bench is thinking of taking a drastic step by staying the law. The CJI said it is because someone has to take the responsibility to solve the issue.
Asking about responsibility by Venugopal, CJI Bobde said the Central government has to take the responsibility.
“You are saying that you have tried negotiation but had it been done in a proper way, the present volatile situation would not have arisen. We are not protecting law breakers. We want to prevent damage to public property. The right to protest will be exercised freely as Gandhiji exercised satyagraha,”
the CJI said.
On Venugopal’s submissions that the protesters will try to disrupt the Republic Day celebrations, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave said the farmers are not going to obstruct the Republic Day parade since they have family members in the armed forces. They will allow the parade to proceed peacefully. The CJI once again said the handling of the situation by the government is not proper and a decision has to be taken today itself. “Who is going to be responsible if this situation gets worse and results in an unwarranted situation,” the CJI said.
Salve said the bench may pass an order for a stay on the law if it is on an assurance that it will achieve peace. Your lordship will give an assurance that in the next hearing you will not turn your chair and say that the law will be repealed. The CJI said you should not get into all this, Dave has ensured his assistance while Salve said there should also be an assurance that both the parties shall come with an open mind. The bench says that it cannot assure that.
The Court allowed the impleadment of several parties including the Confederation of All India Traders, South Indian Federation of Farmers and others.
The bench says the prime issue before the bench is the possible loss of lives of people and property. “Who will take the responsibility. Will the farmers take the responsibility?”
Dave said nobody can take that responsibility. Senior Advocate H.S. Phoolka, assisting Dave, said there are a number of protesters who are not farmers. These kind of things are going on and for these people nobody can take responsibility.
The CJI says the representatives should persuade the protesters to go back home. And then later, they may include in the order that senior citizens and children should not associate with such protests.
CJI Bobde said tell them the CJI has asked them to go back home. I am ready to take the risk.
The Farmers Union has appointed a committee of lawyers which includes Dave, Senior Advocates H.S. Phoolka and Colin Gonsalves.
The plea against the farmers’ protest is that the residents of NCT Delhi/Haryana, having a population of more than two million people, are being put to hardship by the protest which is seriously inhibiting the supply of essential goods. According to the petitioners, this will result in a sharp increase in the prices of goods which would be difficult for people to bear in these times of pandemic.
The bench had suggested that in order to bring about an effective solution to the present stalemate between the protesters and the government of India, the bench considered it appropriate in the interests of justice to constitute a Committee comprising independent and impartial persons including experts in the field of agriculture for the purpose. This may not be possible without hearing all the necessary parties. Till the parties come before the Court, the bench directed all the counsels to obtain suggestions about the constitution of the said committee from all the parties, which may be submitted by them on the date of next hearing in the matter. The bench had also asked the petitioners to implead the unserved farmers as parties to the case.
Also Read: Madras High Court directs govt to allow conduct of Kanuparivettai festival
Before rising on Monday, the bench asked Solicitor General Mehta to initiate talks with retired Justice R.M. Lodha to head the proposed court-appointed committee to talk to farmers.