Citizens' inquiries.

Byline: A.G. Noorani

THE newly appointed Chief Justice of India (CJI) A.S. Bobde began his tenure by turning a Nelson's eye to the outrages perpetrated on those protesting the Modi regime's brazenly communal Citizenship Amendment Act.

On Dec 16, senior counsel sought a court-ordered inquiry into allegations of police excesses at Jamia Millia Islamia, Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) and elsewhere. Heading the bench, the CJI said, 'We will not hear the matter if the protest, violence, destruction of public property doesn't stop,' adding that that the issue would be decided in a 'cool atmosphere' and that 'we are not going to be bullied'. The court was informed that injured students were not being given medical aid. A counsel who had visited the spot said that police beat students in the JMI library, forcing them to hide in the toilets. The CJI was unmoved.

The next day, the supreme court refused to set up an inquiry committee but directed the petitioners to approach the high courts. CJI Bobde said, 'We are not a trial court. We cannot assume jurisdiction for whatever is happening all over the country.' He asked, 'Why don't you go to high courts? The protests have occurred in different places, and each has different consequences ... We cannot go into all facts...'

On Dec 19, responsible dailies carried reports of police brutality on the students of AMU. In glaring contrast to CJI Bobde's remarks were those made by Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court Govind Mathur. 'You have made it a war-like situation,' he told counsel for the state.

The protesting students were not armed; the police were.

This was not a vindication of the supreme court but an indication of two diametrically opposite approaches. The high court did not shirk its duty under Article 226 to enforce fundamental rights. CJI Bobde did, and on specious grounds. Article 32 itself embodies a distinct fundamental right - the right to move the supreme court, no less, for the enforcement of fundamental rights. In the present case, the rights to life and personal liberty, to freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably were all directly involved. The students were not armed. The police were, and felt free to enter the campuses and even violate the quiet and privacy of the JMI library.

On Dec 20, a team of the National Human Rights Commission visited JMI to inquire into charges of violations of human rights; a case of a body set up by a statute discharging the duties which...