UP govt drops notices to seize properties of anti-CAA protesters

On February 11, the Supreme Court observed that the state government had not followed due process.

Anti-CAA protests, CAA, protests, Delhi,
New Delhi: Protesters hurl brick-bats during clashes between a group of anti-CAA protestors and supporters of the new citizenship act, at Jafrabad in north-east Delhi, Monday, Feb. 24, 2020 | PTI
IANS Lucknow
2 min read Last Updated : Feb 18 2022 | 7:48 AM IST

The Uttar Pradesh government has withdrawn notice sent to the anti-CAA protesters seeking to recover damages.

The move to seize properties of people involved in the December 2019 protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) comes after the Supreme Court pointed out last week that the state may have overreached itself.

"The state government has withdrawn the notices for the recovery of damages," said a senior officer.

According to the officials, additional district magistrates (ADMs), who headed the recovery claims tribunals in different districts, issued 274 notices for recovery of damages. including 95 issued to protesters in Lucknow.

On February 11, the Supreme Court observed that the state government had not followed due process.

"You have become complainant; you have become witness; you have become prosecutor... and then you attach properties of people. Is it permissible under any law?" a bench of Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant had asked the state government's law officer.

In an earlier case, the apex court observed in 2009 that the power to compute damages and investigate liability for destruction of public property is to be exercised either by a serving or retired high court judge or a retired district judge as a claims' commissioner.

The anti-CAA protests turned violent at some places in December 2019. Some protestors allegedly vandalised and torched public property in many cities, including Lucknow.

The state government issued notices to recover the cost of properties damaged, relying on the Allahabad high court's 2011 judgment in Mohammad Shujauddin versus State of UP case. It, however, ignored the Supreme Court guidelines issued in 2009 and subsequently in 2018.

"If the state government has decided to withdraw notices, it's a welcome move. But the government has done so under the pressure of Supreme Court," said SR Darapuri, a former IPS officer, who too was given a notice.

--IANS

amita/pgh

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

Topics :Uttar PradeshSupreme CourtUP govt

First Published: Feb 18 2022 | 7:48 AM IST

Next Story