The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a public interest litigation seeking its intervention over controversial remarks made by a BJP leader in Mumbai, directing the petitioner to approach local authorities instead.
A two-judge bench comprising Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Sheel Nagu cautioned the petitioner’s legal counsel against sensationalizing sensitive disputes. Justice Amanullah remarked that high-profile litigation on such issues could inadvertently prompt others to replicate the behavior. He reminded the counsel of their primary duty as citizens and officers of the court to recognize the far-reaching social consequences of publicizing these matters.
The legal challenge followed controversial remarks attributed to Nazia Elahi Khan, a leader in the minority wing of the Bharatiya Janata Party. Last month, police in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region filed two First Information Reports against Khan for allegedly making derogatory comments about Prophet Muhammad that offended the Muslim community. During the hearing, the petitioner’s representative expressed concern that Khan’s statements threatened local communal harmony.
The Importance Of Judicial Hierarchy
Addressing the petitioner’s decision to bypass lower courts, Justice Amanullah questioned why local legal remedies had not been pursued first. He emphasized the importance of maintaining faith in the established judicial system, explaining that the Supreme Court serves as an oversight body rather than a first port of call.
The bench noted a troubling trend of litigants bypassing lower-level authorities to seek direct relief from the apex court. Justice Amanullah warned that avoiding established legal pathways disrupts the functioning of the entire judicial system, leaving lower authorities under the impression that all actions must originate from the top.
A Direct Warning On Law Enforcement
While acknowledging the gravity of the allegations and agreeing that the remarks had the potential to inflame passions locally, the bench insisted that constitutional and statutory procedures must be followed.
Justice Amanullah assured the petitioner that the Supreme Court would step in if local remedies proved ineffective. He stated that individuals who break the law should be prosecuted with its full force by local authorities, adding that the top court’s doors would remain open 24/7 if the procedural system failed to deliver justice.
