Supreme Court rebuffs Thackerays

In a strong rebuff to the Thackeray clan, the Supreme Court last week asserted that every Indian has the right to settle and work anywhere in the country. A bench headed by Justices H K Sema and Markandey Katju said, “India is not an association or confederation of states. It is a union of states, and there is only one nationality, that is Indian. Hence, every Indian has a right to go anywhere in India, settle anywhere, and work and do business of his choice in any part of India peacefully.” The bench also deplored the growing tendency among sections to resort to violence on issues, and asked communities to be respectful to each other’s sentiments. “In a multi-cultural country like ours, with such diversity, one should not be over-sensitive and over touchy about a short restriction when it is being done out of respect for the sentiments of a particular section of society.”

In the first part of the ruling, the Supreme Court has only reiterated the constitutional position, which gives every Indian the right to settle and work anywhere in the country. However, the problem with people like Thackeray, and some organisations in other states, is that they have scant respect for the Constitution. I am sure both Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray and his nephew Raj Thackeray were aware of the constitutional position, and yet they spoke against migrants, particularly Biharis, coming to Mumbai. There is no mystery here: clearly, the comments were aimed at strengthening their vote bank among Maharashtrians. But at what cost? Some actions often cause incalculable harm in the long run. The Congress attempt to divide Akalis and support Bhindranwale in Punjab led to the creation of a monster that finally had to be put down at great cost to Hindu-Sikh amity. One of the things that a serious government at the Centre should do is to make the law more stringent against those who try to create disaffection among citizens. Raj Thackeray managed to get bail immediately for his utterances though a moderate jail sentence would have cooled his fervour.

The second part of the Supreme Court judgement on respecting the sentiments of other communities is also welcome. In this case, a nine-day ban on sale of meat ordered by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation during a Jain festival was challenged by an organisation representing slaughter houses. The organisation won the case in the Gujarat High Court, which struck down the ban as unconstitutional. The Supreme Court upheld the ban, overturning the High Court verdict.