Supreme Court of India
RUPINDER SINGH SODHL AND ANOTHER versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
- Decided
- 18 November 1982
- Judges listed
- Y.V. CHANDRACHUD
- Disposal
- Disposed off
Citations
- Official
- [1983] 1 S.C.R. 841 · 1982 INSC 84
- Not shown
- 2 other citation strings that other judgments attach to this one, on evidence too thin or too divided to publish.
Cited by
We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.
Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.
The Court's text
Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.
CoANDRACHUD, c.J • . By these writ petitions, the .
p. 842, margin E
whom are practising lawyers and some Memb some o f . . d' . . Parliament, ask for an approprtate ·wnt . trectmg the Haryana and the. State of Uttar Pradesh to remove all ob on the highways and to allo~ unhin~ered and .uninterc~pte . of highways railways and atrways w1thout mak~n~ any dtscrtmina against tbe.Akali Sikhs on th~ grou~d of rehg10n. Stated · the case of the petitioners that the recent past, a was set afoot . in the State of Punjab consequent upon de~ands made by the members of the Akali' Party and as of that movement, large scale arrests of Sikhs were effected, an harassment and persecution. It would appear that a was made by certain Akali leaders that a Morcba would to Delhi on November 19, 1982 which coincides with the inagurati of the Asiad games. Apprehending that the Morcha will with the holding of the games, the border . States, particulariy Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, appear to have taken certain to intercept the movement of Akalis across the border on with a ·view to ensuring that the proposed Morcha is not ·the manner feared and the Asiad not disrupted. .
p. 842, margin E
Mi. Hardev Singh who appears on behalf of the argues that highways are dedicated to the public and are their · use for passin~ and repassing. Therefore, he obstruction can be placed thereon which will impede the of traffic, any such obstruction being per se unlawful. Having our anxious consideration to the submissions made by Mr. ·Singh, we agree that no one is entitled to barricade a highway as to prevent members of the public from using it while on their lawful business in the pursuit of normal avocations of But the police, whose duty it is to enforce law and order wake of threatened inass agitations which are reasonably lead to ~reach of public peace, are entitled in the discha duty to tm~ose reasonable restraints on the physical movement members ot the public in order to the protection of public an~ the avoidance of needless inconvenience to other tbe1r lawful pursuits. But all such restraints on personalliber~Y·
p. 842, margin D
11 at ~ •• ha~e to be ·commensurate with the object which the1r JUstification. They must be . . d ot
p. 842, margin G
. mlntma an 1 cann cdonst~amts of the particular situation either . in nature urahon. Above h ' t ey cannot be used as engines of opprc:
p. 842, margin H
(Chundrachud, C.J.) tion harassment or the like. The sanctity of
p. 843
' . • d person r, to be ma111tame at all costs and that c
p. 843, margin A
. . an not ever
p. 843, margin A
under the se ._of mamtenance of and order. _ W feel uneasy and concerned to hear that pol
p. 843, margin A
. · States have . VIolated the norms uf decency in the'
p. 843, margin A
. .. f the situation artSmg out o t e Akah-Asiad tangle
p. 843, margin D
of better evidence ~hat the gn~vance made by the petitioners ore us is plOre_ the ~~spnng of a natural feeling of resentment ~ing stopped and ~earcbed . than 0~ any substantial personal freed?m. )f and when there is proof of tatter, have to step m and stop the excesses. · But the
p. 843, margin E
that no person shall . be subjected to harsh, unci di minatory. treatment . even when tbe objective is the paramount exigencies of law a~d order. Therefore, allowed to be so treated if our Constitution has to
p. 843, margin C
and effect. _ believe it not to be true that any Chief Minister has
p. 843, margin C
declaration that police officers who will treat the Akali s will be dealt with lightly·. It is incredible that any person in his senses can possibly make such a
p. 843, margin A
the kind or pressure of public opinion and the press fortunately, we have in our count~ to-day. · • There does not appear to be any executive order in writing at any rate, authorising the police to barricade or to subject every Sikh in motion~to physical restraint. appropriate case, a presumption may well be drawn istence of such an order if it is found that the police are acting systematically according to a set and uniform pattern or are ~t~erwise engaged in a large scale operation of an! similar or
p. 843, margin A
kind. For want of acceptable evidence, we hesitate t presumption in this case and will leave' the matter where r . t~e time being. Redress may, if so advised, be sought v cases by those aggrieved by the· alleged acts of excesses.
p. 843, margin F
This order will dispose of these writ petitions. li.t.c.
p. 843, margin H