Recovery of property damage

The Supreme Court has rightly pulled up the Uttar Pradesh Government over the recovery notices sent for damage to public property during the anti-CAA protests. The court has observed that the notices were in violation of the law on procedural grounds as these were not issued by judicial officers, as warranted by the court’s ruling, but by administrative officers of the rank of ADM. One notice was allegedly addressed to a person who had died six years ago. The apex court’s directive is likely to bring respite to those victimised, including daily-wage earners already reeling under the pandemic’s impact on their livelihoods. The protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act in 2019-20 were widespread, even as the government’s efforts to allay apprehensions regarding the law proved to be inadequate. Agitations and protests are common in a democracy, but when things spiral out of control due to mishandling of a tense situation by the authorities, public property becomes a soft target for venting ire. A recent example is the vandalising of train bogies over alleged irregularities in a railway recruitment exam in Bihar.

Haryana had passed a similar law for the recovery of damage caused to public property. While there is no denying that arson and violence have no place in a civilised society, the effort should be to make the already existing provisions in the law work instead of going in for more laws that may turn out to be draconian. Rather than fanning the flames, political parties and social/religious organisations should try to dissuade protesters from taking extreme steps and motivate them to air their grievances at the right forum.

Even as Uttar Pradesh is in the midst of seven-phase polling for the Assembly elections, the court has told the state government to withdraw the controversial notices by February 18. It is expected that the due process of law would finally be followed at the earliest.  

#CAA