New Delhi: The petitions challenging the government ban on screening of BBC documentary are a drain on Supreme Court’s “precious” time, Union law minister Kiren Rijiju said on Monday.
The minister’s comments came minutes after the top court agreed to list one of the petitions challenging the government ban on BBC documentary India: The Modi Question on February 6 while promising urgent hearing to another plea questioning the social media curbs on circulating the documentary.
“This is how they waste the precious time of Supreme Court where thousands of common citizens are waiting and seeking dates for justice,” Rijiju said in a tweet.
The post came in response to a news from the top court agreeing to hear the petition filed jointly by Trinamool Congress MP Mohua Moitra, journalist N Ram and advocate Prashant Bhushan. A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud has listed the petition for hearing later this week and posted another similar petition by advocate ML Sharma February 6.
“For how long false propaganda can sustain? The matter is settled & set aside by the highest Court of India,” the law minister said in another tweet. “What is the motive of these kind of people? What is their objective? Is Supreme Court of India supreme or BBC? India has moved much beyond this colonial mindset.”
Earlier too, Rijiju has been critical of matters taken up by the top court. Last month, while addressing parliament, he said, “If Supreme Court starts hearing bail applications and starts hearing all frivolous PILs, it will definitely cause a lot of extra burden on the Court, because SC, by and large, is treated as a Constitutional court.”
In a subtle response to the Minister’s comment, CJI Chandrachud on December 17 commented that Supreme Court’s main purpose is to exercise its jurisdiction as “protector of fundamental right to life and personal liberty inhering in every citizen”. A judgment given by CJI that same day came as a rebuttal to Rijiju’s comment that bail matters create extra burden on court. “The right to personal liberty is a precious and inalienable right recognized by Constitution. In attending to such grievances, the Supreme Court performs a plain constitutional duty, obligation and function; no more and no less,” the top court said.
Of late, the tiff between the judiciary and the Union government has played out in the open over their public spar over collegium being opaque followed by the minister’s open dislike of Collegium putting out IB and R&AW reports in the public domain as part of their resolutions uploaded on court’s website.
