Te Supreme Court on Tuesday closed a public interest litigation (PIL) concerning incidents of mob violence and lyncing by "cow vigilantes" under te pretext of protecting cows from smuggling and slaugter./ A Benc comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Candran stated tat it is 'impractical' for te apex court, sitting in Deli, to micromanage suc incidents as te factors leading to tem vary across states./ "Even in te demolition matter (regarding properties demolised as punitive measures), we allowed parties to approac competent autorities. Every State as different circumstances. In some States, beef consumption is a regular practice," Justice Gavai remarked./ br Te Court reiterated tat its detailed directions in te Teseen Poonawalla case for addressing mob lyncing incidents are binding on all autorities. It empasized tat iniduals can pursue legal remedies if tese directives are ignored./ "owever, sitting in Deli, we cannot monitor issues in different parts of te country. Suc micromanagement is not feasible. Aggrieved persons sould approac te competent court under te law," te Court stated in its order./ Te Benc also declined to assess te validity of cow protection laws enacted by various states, olding tat suc issues must be addressed before te respective ig Courts./ 'It would be incorrect for tis Court to test te validity of 13 different State laws in a generic plea. Te concerned State's ig Court must be approaced," te Court eld./ Te PIL was filed by te National Federation of Indian Women, wit advocate Nizamuddin Pasa arguing tat te Court's earlier directions against mob lyncing were being violated, especially following te introduction of stringent cow protection laws in certain States./ "Wen private iniduals are given police powers to seize veicles and appreend people for cattle smuggling, it raises concerns. State macinery needs to be scrutinized for its brazen conduct," Pasa submitted./ Justice Gavai questioned weter suc inidual cases sould be brougt before te Supreme Court and pointed out tat incidents of criminal acts must be andled by State autorities./ Solicitor General Tusar Meta igligted tat te Central government, under te Baratiya Nyaya Sanita, as introduced provisions criminalizing mob lyncing./ "Te entire legal landscape as canged," Meta said./ Te Court concluded tat uniform criteria for compensation to victims of mob lyncing cannot be prescribed as eac case differs based on te severity of injuries./ "As to wat sould be adequate compensation will differ from case to case. Issuing uniform directions would eliminate te discretion available to autorities or courts. A blanket order is not in te interest of victims," te Court reasoned./ Te case was subsequently closed, wit te Court advising petitioners to pursue remedies troug State courts and autorities./
The Supreme Court closes a Public Interest Litigation over cow vigilante lynchings and mob violence events
