Tehseen S. Poonawalla v.

Union of India (2018) 6 SC 72

INTRODUCTION-
In recent years a lot of incidents have come to light where mobs have lynched individuals under the
guise of cow vigilantism. In most of the incidents of lynching, it was later found out that the
controversy was a fake one generated by hate propaganda and there was no truth in the allegations
which led to the lynching of the innocent people.
There were huge protests against such activities and people from all quarters raised their voice
against such incidents. Efforts were made by a lot of individuals belonging to different fields and
areas to create awareness amongst people against such incidents and the misuse of the social media
which was being done to plant fake stories and news which ultimately resulted in such incidents.

FACTS-
After the brutal lynching incidents in Delhi and Haryana, the petitioner who was a public spirited
social activist petitioned the court for directions and intervention in the violence being spread by
cow vigilantes and protection groups.

ISSUES-
The primary relief for directions was with regard to seeking immediate and necessary protection
from vigilante and fringe groups which had taken recourse to violence under the garb of cow
protection. Another relief sought was for the removal of inflammatory contents from the social
media platforms which was being circulated by these groups.

PETITIONER’S ARGUMENTS-
It was argued that no one shall engage in an activity of lynching just on the basis of a perception
that an offence had taken place. It was pointed out that activities which amounted to mob violence
and lynching were to be checked by the executive and must not go unnoticed. Reliance was placed
on the case of Vahini v. Union of India (2018) 7  SCC  192.
After making a reference to Martin Luther king, it was argued that law can be invoked and used to
keep the man from lynching him. It was stated that over the recent days there was increased activity
of violence and incidents of mob lynching were taking place where the target audience was the
members of the minority communities.
It was stated that the primary reason for such activities was the circulation of false news and
information which was based on the suspicion that the victims were engaging illegally in activities
of cattle trade etc.
It was further argued that that the Central Government had the power to intervene in the matter by
using its power which had been vested in it by Articles 256 and 257 of the Constitution for issuing
directions to the State Governments.

RESPONDENT’S ARGUMENTS
The respondents were the Central Government and State Governments and they duly assisted the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in coming up with guidelines on the issue at hand.

JUDGMENT-
The Hon’ble Supreme Court after listening to the arguments and suggestions formulated the
following guidelines and measures:
1. Measures for preventing the Incidents
• A senior police officer was to be appointed as a Nodal Officer by the state governments in
each district and a special task force shall be constituted for procuring intelligence reports
potential perpetrators.
• The State Governments shall identify areas, where there were the incidents of mob violence
and lynching, had occurred previously.
• Personnel deployed in identified areas are supposed to remain extra cautious.
• Regular meetings shall be held by the nodal officer.
• Police Officers must use their power under Section 129 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973,
in order to deal with incidents of mob violence and in situations where he thinks that a
similar situation may arise in front of him.
2. Remedies for the incidents
• FIR in such cases must be lodged immediately.
• The police station where the FIR is lodged must forward the same and inform about it to the
Nodal Officer.
• The investigation is to be monitored by the Nodal Officer who must that the investigation is
carried out effectively and the charge-sheet in filed timely.
• A compensation scheme shall be formulated by the state governments for helping the family
of the victims.
• Fast Track courts or special courts to be established in order to try the cases of lynching and
mob violence.
• The trial is to be held on day to day basis and shall be concluded within 6 months from the
commencement
• Maximum sentence is to be awarded in order to set a staunch example in cases of mob
violence and lynching when an accused is found guilty.
• The identity and address of the witness is to be concealed for protection of the witness.
• Free legal aid is to provide to the victim or his next of kin.
3. The criminalization of such activities
• In case where it is found that a police officer or public officer who belongs to the district
administration has failed to abide with the directions of the court in order to prevent or
facilitate the expeditious trial of any such incident of mob violence and lynching, then it
shall be considered as an act of deliberate negligence and misconduct.
• Such an act is to be punished by the government and departmental inquiry is to instituted
against such an officer.
• If it is found that an officer did not prevent the incident of violence or lynching even when
he was aware and had knowledge about its taking place then action is to be taken by the
concerned governments against such officers.
• In cases where the incident has already occurred and the official did not promptly apprehend
and institute criminal proceedings against the culprits then also action is to be taken by the
concerned governments against such officers.