New Delhi, Sep 1 : The Supreme Court on Thursday said it was unable to make an informed decision on the truthfulness of claims in the case regarding the alleged attacks against Christians in the country and it is vital to distinguish the grain from chaff.It demanded the Union Ministry of Home Affairs to request confirmation reports from Bihar, Haryana, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Odisha, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.
The apex court has granted two months to conduct the whole process of collecting data, including registration of FIRs and arrests, the information about the status of investigation, and charge sheets that were filed.
A bench of Justices D.Y.Chandrachud and Hima Kohli said the court “can’t make an assessment regarding the credibility of claims that were made (in the plea) presented to us .”.
It stated that all the Chief Secretaries of all eight states must ensure that all the necessary information is provided to the MHA and the outcome of verification must be submitted in the highest court.
The court also said it is better to confirm the allegations that are made in the plea.
Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, representing the petitioners, said that 700 prayer gatherings of Christians were shut down and that violence was employed against them.
He claimed that the time that instances of violence were reported to police, they requested the people to cease prayer meetings .They also provided horrifying details of various instances of violent acts against Christians.He advised the court that petitioner recorded the incidents where Christians were slain.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre said that the MHA after a thorough investigation, discovered that a number of incidents, mentioned in the plea as communal attacks were either fake or exaggerated.
The bench stated that even though it believes that crime against an individual doesn’t necessarily mean that it is a crime against society, but if the court found that 10 percent of the cases included in the PIL were true and it was necessary to determine the root of the issue.
In the hearing the bench mentioned that there were crimes, and there are crimes committed by the community and “we must differentiate and we are asking the states to take action.We must separate the grain from chaff”.
Mehta opposed the petition, saying that “notice to the states that they must conduct an inquiries.
These could have implications” and that petitioner’s argument is based on self-serving information which their own staff gather information about the allegations.
He claimed that upon an investigation at the ground at the ground level, 162 of the cases mentioned in the PIL were discovered to be false.
The court said that certain victims may not have resources to pursue the legal option, and also said that the court isn’t keen to conduct an ad hoc probe however, it could select certain states.
Mehta commented that according to petitioner there were a few incidents mentioned in West Bengal and it was the most peaceful.
The bench also said it could request state governments to inform it of what steps have been taken in relation to instances of violent acts towards the Christian community.It also demanded Gonsalves to provide the details with authorities concerned.
The bench said it could begin with the verification exercise in an area of at least five states and request MHA to provide an report after analyzing the information on what actions have been taken in response to these instances of violence.
In the past in the past, earlier, the Central government had informed the Supreme Court there is no justification in the petition alleging a rise in assaults on Christians in the country.
It claimed that such deceitful petitions are causing unrest across the country, could be used to get aid from outside the country to interfere with the internal matters of the country.
The MHA, in a written response, stated: “It is submitted that there is a secret motive in the filing of these fraudulent petitions, causing unrest across the country, and possibly for receiving assistance from outside the country to interfere with the internal matters of the nation.”
The petitioner had turned to self-serving and false documents.It also referenced press reports, where Christian persecutions are either untrue or incorrectly projected.
The MHA’s response was based on an appeal alleging a rise in the amount of attacks against Christian religious institutions and priests throughout the nation and calling for the application of the guidelines it has issued to stop hate crimes.
The petitioners Rev.Peter Machado and others sought the implementation of the guidelines that were issued by the apex court in the year 2018 Tehseen Poonawala judgement.
ss/vd
