The Supreme Court on Friday issued a notice to the Uttar Pradesh government on a plea seeking quashing of the notices issued by the state administration to recover the damage to public property caused during the protests against Citizenship Amendment Act.
A division bench of Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice KM Joseph asked the Uttar Pradesh government to file its response within four weeks.
The court was hearing a plea, filed by petitioner advocate Parvez Arif Titu, seeking appropriate directions for setting up an independent judicial enquiry to probe the incidents during the protests against the CAA and NRC in Uttar Pradesh.
The plea stated that in an "arbitrary manner" notices were sent in Uttar Pradesh to a person, who had died six years ago at the age of 94. Recovery notices were issued to two others who are aged above 90, the plea claimed.
Seeking a stay on the notices, the petition stated that notices have been sent to persons who have not been booked under any penal provisions neither have any criminal offences been made out against them.
Senior advocate RB Singhal, appearing for Titu, contended that recovery notices were based on an Allahabad High Court judgement passed in 2010 which is in "violation of the guidelines" passed by the Supreme Court in a 2009 judgment which was later re-affirmed in a 2018 verdict.
The plea, filed through advocate Nilofar Khan, stated, "The contradiction is that while the Supreme Court in 2009 put the onus of assessment of damages and recovery from the accused on high courts of every state, whereas the Allahabad High Court had issued guidelines in 2010 judgement that let the state government undertake these processes to recover damages, which has serious implications".
The petition also sought a direction to the Uttar Pradesh government to follow the procedure as per the 2009 and 2018 guidelines of the top court while claiming damages to recover the losses caused to public property during such protests.
The petition said that as many as 925 persons, who have been arrested in the matter, "may not get bail easily until they pay the losses".
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
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
