top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 8:56:24 pm

HC denies shield to anti-CEC protesters

Court says it will intervene if specific illegalities are brought to its notice Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday refused to pass blanket orders against police detentions of people protesting against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, while assuring that it would take action if specific illegalities are brought before it. The court was hearing a petition filed by advocate Sagar Devre, who alleged that Mumbai police illegally detained hundreds of peaceful demonstrators,...

HC denies shield to anti-CEC protesters

Court says it will intervene if specific illegalities are brought to its notice Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday refused to pass blanket orders against police detentions of people protesting against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, while assuring that it would take action if specific illegalities are brought before it. The court was hearing a petition filed by advocate Sagar Devre, who alleged that Mumbai police illegally detained hundreds of peaceful demonstrators, including women and students, who took out marches in solidarity with agitations in the national capital over the weekend. Advocate Manish Tomar, representing the petitioner, urged the court to issue an interim order restraining the police from making further detentions during peaceful demonstrations. A division bench, however, declined the plea for a general stay on police action.
Court’s Assurance "We cannot pass a blanket order saying no person shall be detained. You point out if there is any such instance, we will take care. We will not permit anything wrong," the court observed. Additional Government Pleader Manish Upadhye sought time to seek instructions from the concerned authorities on the claims made in the petition. Accepting the request, the high court adjourned the matter and posted the plea for further hearing on October 19. Devre's plea sought protection of the fundamental rights of citizens, peaceful demonstrators, lawyers and others in connection with the protests in the national capital against the CEC. Terming it as an issue involving the fundamental right of people, the PIL said it was filed to protect a simple freedom of every Mumbai resident citizens – to walk freely on the city roads, to stand peacefully with others, or to stay in one’s home “without being lifted and carried away” by the police without an individual reason. It mentioned how students were allegedly picked up from their homes in connection with protest cases dating back to July 2026, which the petition said had already been quashed by the Supreme Court. Making it clear that the challenge was not against the police’s legal authority to regulate public assemblies or the political positions taken by protesters, the petitioner claimed it was to question the practice of detaining people without individualised, lawful and recorded reasons, or using previously quashed cases and past detentions against them. Invoking Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law, the plea argued that coercive action based merely on a person's association, appearance on a list, previous detention or presence in a public place would amount to arbitrary state action. It further contended that a quashed FIR could not be used as a continuing basis for hostile discriminatory treatment as a ‘permanent mark’ against a citizen since "a quashed FIR is no FIR at all”. The PIL seeks the court's declaration as 'unconstitutional' the sweeping detention of peaceful demonstrators, pedestrians and others without lawful individual justification. It seeks an independent inquiry into the alleged police excesses, preservation of CCTV footage, police records, a verified list of the detenus and framing of standard operating procedures to govern policing action during mass-protests. Long detentions The petitioner contended that the detentions went beyond the demonstrators to include bystanders and passers-by, among them women, a mother with a child and a senior citizen. Among those detained included Mahatma Gandhi’s great-grandson Tushar Arun Gandhi, his daughter Kasturi, actor Imran Khan, activists Feroze Mithiborwala, S. L. Guddi, scores of youth and students, though they were released after several hours of detention by various police stations.

Clever seat selection helped BJP to secure historic win

Writer: Ruddhi Phadke
Ruddhi Phadke
Nov 29, 2024
2 min read

The party won 65 seats against Congress, 37 against NCP (SP) and 29 against Shiv Sena (UBT)

Clever seat selection

Mumbai: The BJP’s strategic seat sharing with the allies has proved beneficial for the party. An analysis of the Assembly election results show that the BJP has scored over its main rival, the Congress, in a big way because of the direct fights.


The analysis shows that BJP defeated all three constituents of the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) – Congress, Shiv Sena (UBT) and NCP (SP) – in the direct fights. This is attributed as one of the reasons for the BJP’s historic poll success.


The BJP contested 147 out of 288 seats. In 76 constituencies, it faced Congress. BJP secured victory in 65 seats and lost only 11 seats, making it a whopping 86 per cent of the total direct fights. This was followed by an even stronger performance against NCP (SP). Of the total 39 fights with Sharad Pawar’s party, BJP captured 37 seats making it 95 per cent of the total fights with NCP (SP). BJP and Shiv Sena (UBT) were head-to-head in 32 constituencies, of which BJP emerged victorious in 29 seats, making this 91 per cent of the total direct contests.


According to a BJP strategist the party had bargained hard with its allies, Shiv Sena and NCP to get the desired constituencies in the seat sharing formula. “We had studied to potential candidates of the MVA. That helped us in choosing the seats where we can register comfortable victories,” the strategist said.


BJP spokesperson Niranjan Shetty attributed the success to all the party workers who worked hard to boost development, infrastructure in the state. He gave credit to Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis for his contribution to the party’s success.


Shetty pointed out that in 2019, Uddhav Thackeray had stalled all the “novel” and “legendary” projects that Fadnavis had started when he had taken over as CM, making it very easy for the people of Maharashtra to strike a comparison between both the leaders and the potential they had for serving the people. “Devendra Fadnavis gave up his post very easily for the larger good. There are many such examples like Venkaiah Naidu who was BJP National President and later worked as the Vice President of India because that was the need of the hour. We seldom care about our posts,” Shetty told The Perfect Voice.


Congress spokesperson Atul Londhe refused to call the election results as the people’s mandate. “This is not at all a Janata mandate. Despite Maharashtra struggling with so many basic social issues, how can BJP acquire such a huge mandate is the question. If a student copies and fails with just passing marks, it can go unnoticed, but if a student copies and bags the number one position, something is fishy. Why is the BJP scared of ballot papers?” he said.

Comments

bottom of page