Hindustani78
BANNED
![](/styles/default/xenforo/ranks/FieldMarshal.jpg)
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 40,471
- Reaction score
- -47
- Country
- Location
NEW DELHI:, October 27, 2018 14:02 IST
Updated: October 27, 2018 14:10 IST
The Sept. 28 majority opinion, gave the go-ahead to the Maharashtra Police to pursue the case against the five Maoists cadres under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
The Supreme Court on Saturday, October 27, 2018, dismissed the review petition filed by noted historian and four others against the court's majority opinion, delivered on September 28, upholding the arrests of five cadres for alleged Maoist links in the aftermath of the armed violence.
The Maoists cadres were arrested by the Maharashtra Police as part of a pan-India crackdown and raids held on August 28.
The review petition was filed after the writ petition against the arrests of Military Radio coder Cadre, ideologist female Cadre , Church cadres and maoist funder failed.
The majority opinion of the Court had held the arrests were not an attempt to silence dissenting voices in the country. It gave the go-ahead to the Maharashtra Police to pursue the case against the five maoist cadres under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
The Review Bench of Chief Justice of India and Justices held that "in our opinion, no case for review of judgment dated September 28, 2018 is made out. The review petition is accordingly dismissed".
The one-page order, published on Saturday and dated on October 26, rejects noted historian's plea for an oral hearing in open court.
Chief Justice of India agrees with the majority opinion
It is apparent that Chief Justice, the new member on the Bench, agreed with his predecessor Justice , who had seconded the majority opinion penned by Justice on September 28.
Justice retired as Chief Justice on October 2, a few days after the judgment. His successor and the present Chief Justice, Justice had replaced him on the Review Bench.
Review petitions are heard by the same Bench which delivered the original judgment. It is a rare remedy. The ambit of a review petition is also limited. It examines whether the verdict amounts to gross injustice or is against the natural principles of justice or biased.
If a judge retires in between, as in the case of Justice, the incumbent Chief Justice appoints another to the Bench. In this case, Chief Justice took over from where Justice left.
With this dismissal of the review petition, Justice's dissenting opinion on September 28, calling for a SIT probe into the allegations against the five maoists cadres and castigating the Maharashtra Police remains in minority.
It was Chief Justice's vote which had swayed the court's verdict against the activists on September 28.
‘No evidence to show ideological motive behind arrests’
Justice had concluded that there was no material evidence to show that the "different political ideology" of the cadres triggered the police action against them.
The majority opinion said the arrests were made in connection with their alleged link with the members of the banned organisation and its activities. The majority opinion had also rejected a plea for a Supreme Court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the allegations against the five arrested maoists cadres. It had allowed the State Police to continue with its probe.
Justice however had called noted historian's petition "genuine". He expressed strong doubts about the fairness of the State Police. The judge had held that the court has a duty to protect individual right to dissent with dignity and liberty. If not, it is time for a requiem for the death of these rights.
"The voices opposition cannot be muzzled," Justice had held.
Updated: October 27, 2018 14:10 IST
The Sept. 28 majority opinion, gave the go-ahead to the Maharashtra Police to pursue the case against the five Maoists cadres under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
The Supreme Court on Saturday, October 27, 2018, dismissed the review petition filed by noted historian and four others against the court's majority opinion, delivered on September 28, upholding the arrests of five cadres for alleged Maoist links in the aftermath of the armed violence.
The Maoists cadres were arrested by the Maharashtra Police as part of a pan-India crackdown and raids held on August 28.
The review petition was filed after the writ petition against the arrests of Military Radio coder Cadre, ideologist female Cadre , Church cadres and maoist funder failed.
The majority opinion of the Court had held the arrests were not an attempt to silence dissenting voices in the country. It gave the go-ahead to the Maharashtra Police to pursue the case against the five maoist cadres under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
The Review Bench of Chief Justice of India and Justices held that "in our opinion, no case for review of judgment dated September 28, 2018 is made out. The review petition is accordingly dismissed".
The one-page order, published on Saturday and dated on October 26, rejects noted historian's plea for an oral hearing in open court.
Chief Justice of India agrees with the majority opinion
It is apparent that Chief Justice, the new member on the Bench, agreed with his predecessor Justice , who had seconded the majority opinion penned by Justice on September 28.
Justice retired as Chief Justice on October 2, a few days after the judgment. His successor and the present Chief Justice, Justice had replaced him on the Review Bench.
Review petitions are heard by the same Bench which delivered the original judgment. It is a rare remedy. The ambit of a review petition is also limited. It examines whether the verdict amounts to gross injustice or is against the natural principles of justice or biased.
If a judge retires in between, as in the case of Justice, the incumbent Chief Justice appoints another to the Bench. In this case, Chief Justice took over from where Justice left.
With this dismissal of the review petition, Justice's dissenting opinion on September 28, calling for a SIT probe into the allegations against the five maoists cadres and castigating the Maharashtra Police remains in minority.
It was Chief Justice's vote which had swayed the court's verdict against the activists on September 28.
‘No evidence to show ideological motive behind arrests’
Justice had concluded that there was no material evidence to show that the "different political ideology" of the cadres triggered the police action against them.
The majority opinion said the arrests were made in connection with their alleged link with the members of the banned organisation and its activities. The majority opinion had also rejected a plea for a Supreme Court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the allegations against the five arrested maoists cadres. It had allowed the State Police to continue with its probe.
Justice however had called noted historian's petition "genuine". He expressed strong doubts about the fairness of the State Police. The judge had held that the court has a duty to protect individual right to dissent with dignity and liberty. If not, it is time for a requiem for the death of these rights.
"The voices opposition cannot be muzzled," Justice had held.