PDP chief Mehbooba Mufti said on Wednesday that he agrees with the “displeasure” of the Supreme Court on the right to freedom, but it becomes selective when it comes to Kashmiris. Mufti’s statement came in the context of remarks made by the Supreme Court during the hearing on the bail plea of Republic TV editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami.
The former chief minister said on Twitter, “I agree with the Supreme Court’s resentment over the right to freedom, but sadly this resentment is selective as hundreds of Kashmiris and journalists have been kept in jails on baseless allegations. In these cases Forget the verdict of the court, they do not even hear. Why is there no urgency for their freedom? “
Agree with SCs outrage on right to liberty. But sadly this outrage has been selective as there are hundreds of Kashmiris & journalists languishing in jails on baseless charges. Forget court ruling they did not even get a hearing. Why no sense of urgency for their liberty?
– Mehbooba Mufti (@MehboobaMufti) November 11, 2020
The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted interim bail to journalist Arnab Goswami in the 2018 abetment to suicide case, saying it would be a mockery of justice if personal liberty is obstructed. The apex court expressed deep concern over the attitude of state governments in targeting people on the basis of ideology and differences of opinion. A vacation bench of Justices Dhananjay Y Chandrachud and Justice Indira Banerjee said that if state governments target people, they should realize that there is a Supreme Court to protect the freedom of citizens.
What did the Supreme Court say on the right to personal freedom
“We are seeing that there is one case after another in which the High Court is not granting bail and they are failing to protect the freedom, personal liberty of the people,” the bench said during the hearing. Wanted to know from Maharashtra government whether there was any need to interrogate Goswami in custody and said that it was a matter related to “personal freedom”. The bench remarked that Indian democracy is exceptionally resilient and the Maharashtra government should ignore all this (Arnab’s taunts on TV). The bench said, “The question is, will you deprive the person of his personal freedom due to these allegations?” The court said, “If the government will target people on this basis … You dislike the television channel can do….
But it should not happen. “
The bench asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal appearing on behalf of the state government, “Is not the payment of money, abetment to suicide?” It would be a mockery of justice if bail is not granted while the FIR is pending. “The court said,” ‘A’ does not pay money to B and is it a case of abetment to suicide? If the High Court is not If we do not take action in such kind of cases, then personal liberty will be completely destroyed. We are very much worried about it. If we do not take action in such cases, it will be very troublesome. “