Jyoti Chorghe vs State of Maharashtra - A UAPA case study


Nikhil SanjayRekha Adsule

nikhil adsuleI had reasoned this out in my mind; there was one of two things I had a right to, liberty or death; if I could not have one, I would have the other; for no man should take me alive.” - Harriet Tubman

In this post-truth era, where democratic and participatory ethos is being subordinated and where the delicate distribution of powers as envisaged by the Constitution are being eroded, one can witness a trajectory towards authoritarianism with the recent amendments made in a dictatorial fashion to the UAPA (Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act) and NIA (National Investigation Agency) Act. Hon. Home Minister offered a false and an absurd explanation to these amendments by saying that these were in alignment with international laws -- a claim that was refuted immediately by the Amnesty International. The law has had a prolonged history of targeting minorities and the oppressed communities. The judiciary has been vested with the responsibility of containing the trespassing done by the legislators and to re-align them by appropriately interpreting and safeguarding the principles stated in the Constitution of India. A holistic view of the UAPA and its working is discussed here via a transformational Judgement given by Hon.Justice Abhay Thipsay in Jyoti Chorge vs State of Maharashtra is discussed with its finer nuances below..

The Background of the Case

On October 3rd 2012, Bombay High Court delivered a historic judgment which granted bail to Jyoti Babasaheb Chorghe and Sushma Ramteke, both of whom belonged to a performing group called Kabir Kala Manch that uses poetry and music to fight against social injustice. A few years earlier, they were detained under the provisions of UAPA, accused of being Naxalites and part of the cultural front for the banned organization Communist Party of India (Maoist). It was alleged that they had Naxalite literature and publicity material in their possession. Thus, after spending one and a half years in jail, the bail applications of Jyoti Chorghe and Sushma Ramteke came before the Bombay High Court.

History of the Judiciary

A glance at the decisions by the Supreme Court of India, right from the ADM Jabalpur case to the Kartar Singh case and the CJI Ray’s decision to uphold the section 16-A (9) of the MISA (Maintenance of Internal Security Act), shows the attitude of ‘executive supremacy’ as displayed by the judiciary.

Another trait displayed by the top court of India has been that of ‘denial of remedies’ as evident in the ADM Jabalpur case by not allowing the enforcement of Article 21 of the Constitution during the emergency (Article 356) in the name of larger public interest. The next in order is the ‘jurisdiction of suspicion’, which was again displayed and authorized by the ADM Jabalpur, which placed as legitimate the ‘subjective satisfaction’ of the perception of the executive.

Another value that deserves mention is that of ‘salus populi suprema lex’, which in lay terms means ‘welfare is the supreme law’. It finds its genesis in the UK judgment of Liverside vs. Anderson. Ujjwal Kumar Singh points out that in the case of ADM Jabalpur, this value was interpreted by the Supreme Court as ‘what constitutes people’s welfare is essentially a matter of high state policy’ and thus established ‘unreviewable executive supremacy’.

To sum up the trajectory of SC and Judicial Behaviour pertaining to the above mentioned question, constitutional order consists of ‘State of Normalcy’ and ‘State of Exception’. What one can see in the trajectory of the judgments given by the Supreme Court is that the executive became the whole and sole authority to decide upon the State of Exception. The executive gets the upper hand to decide what is to happen to the rights of the citizens, and also becomes the custodian of rights and remedies. The judiciary has often assumed that the executive shall act in good faith and as per the moorings of society, as evidenced in Suresh Kumar Kaushal case of 2012.  

The Judgment

The judgment authored by Hon. Justice Thipsay marked a stark departure from the judicial trajectory described above, as he interpreted the concept of membership in an organization by referring to the Arup Bhuyan vs. State of Assam (2011) case, which differentiated between active and passive membership. This case takes its cue from the Kedarnath Singh Case, which in turn relied upon the US Supreme Court in Brandenburg vs. Ohio case. This judgment declared Chorghe and Ramteke as passive members and most importantly took recourse to the civil rights’ tradition and pegged the interpretation of an anti-terror statute not to the State of Exception but to the Constitution of India.

 Conclusion

Thus, the judgment instituted a judicial philosophy that places personal liberty, and freedom of speech and association at the heart of the Constitutional order. The words of Malcolm X have a lot of significance in this context : It’s liberty or death. It’s freedom for everybody or freedom for nobody”.

~

References

1. Jyoti Chorghe vs State of Maharashtra.

2. Shreya Singhal vs Union of India.

3. Nandini Sundar vs State of Chattisgarh.

4. A.K Gopalan vs State of Madras.

5. ADM Jabalpur vs Shivakant Shukla.

6. Justice K.S Puttuswamy Vs Union of India.

7. Liversidge vs Anderson(1941)

8. Constituent Assembly Debates, Volume 7, Dr. Ambedkars Reply(16th september, 1949)

9. Courting the people by Anuj Bhuwania

10.State of Exception by Giorgio Amben

11.Wages of Impunity: power, justice and human rights by K.G Kannabiran

~~~

 

Nikhil SanjayRekha Adsule is currently pursiing LLM from Tata Institute of Social Sciences. He is an Ambedkarite who dreams of creating a Begumpura of genderless, casteless, classless society.

 

 

Other Related Articles

Statement in support of twelve Bhima Koregaon activists
Saturday, 06 June 2020
  We the undersigned twenty two organizations strongly condemn the shameful imprisonment of public intellectuals and social justice defenders, Dr. Anand Teltumbde and Mr. Gautam Navalakha,... Read More...
ಸ್ತ್ರೀವಾದವು ಬ್ರಾಹ್ಮಣವಾದ - ಭಾಗ ೧
Saturday, 06 June 2020
ಸ್ತ್ರೀವಾದವು ಬ್ರಾಹ್ಮಣವಾದ - ಭಾಗ ೧ ಅನು ರಾಮದಾಸ್ ಇದು 'ಸ್ತ್ರೀವಾದವು ಬ್ರಾಹ್ಮಣವಾದ'... Read More...
Bharat vs India: Understanding Debates of Naming Through Ernest Gellner and Anthony D Smith
Wednesday, 03 June 2020
Vidyasagar Recently, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a plea which sought a direction to the Central government to amend the constitution to change the official name of the country from India to... Read More...
Dalit Women in Higher Education in Odisha
Wednesday, 03 June 2020
  Saraswati Suna "I measure the progress of a community by the degree of progress which women have achieved." ~ Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Education is a path for equal opportunity and ensures... Read More...
Migrant Tears in Untouchable India
Sunday, 31 May 2020
Mungamuri Kranthi Kumar Corona doesn’t know any Caste or Religion, Says Hindutva. It is a blatant lie, It is Brahminical Morality Mocking thousand of years of Bahujan pain and agony. Caste Hindus... Read More...

Recent Popular Articles

Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), and the Tribal Community (Adivasi)
Wednesday, 18 December 2019
  Jawar Bheel Students' protests have rocked the country since the passage of Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB). CAB has already become Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). Also, on November 20th,... Read More...
Reading India in the time of protest!
Saturday, 28 December 2019
  Thongam Bipin Time and again we have seen how India unfolds itself to its margin during protests. It is violent and oppressive. It has made itself clear through its actions that the state... Read More...
The unsure stage of Indian democracy...
Saturday, 28 December 2019
  Shiva Thorat It was around the time that the Constitution of India was delivered to Rajendra Prasad: after Gandhi's assassination by Godse and in response, the former home minister Sardar... Read More...
The legacy of B. R. Ambedkar and his contribution to social justice and equality
Thursday, 19 December 2019
  Kavita Chohan There is a false perception among Indians that Dr. Ambedkar's work addresses the concerns of Dalits and Dalit women only. This perception is not only found among those from... Read More...
Why Dr. Devi Shetty’s 25 (or 2500) ‘ways to manage Covid-19’ should be rejected outright
Tuesday, 07 April 2020
  Dr. Sylvia Karpagam For far too long, Dr. Devi Shetty has been giving advice on a range of things, the most recent being the Covid-19 pandemic. This is a crucial public health period for... Read More...