NEW DELHI, April 7 — In a new twist to the ongoing battle for repeal of the controversial IMDT Act, a fresh petition demanding implementation of the Act to all-over the country has been filed. The case has now been posted for direction in July. The tagging of a new writ petition filed by Prasant Bhusan on behalf of his client Abu Hanifa in support of the Act has added a new angle to the case that has been pending final hearing in the Apex Court since late last year.
A three-member Bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice VN Khaire, comprising Justice Brijesh Kumar and Justice SB Sinha, today after hearing the concerned parties posted the case for further direction after the vacation. This despite the pleas by Ashok Desai and the Union Government’s Counsel to fix a date for final disposal of the case. That the case has a strong political overtone was not lost on the Bench with the Chief Justice remarking that it was an Act framed by the Parliament and therefore should be dealt by it. “If the Government of India finds the law has failed to serve its purpose it has to request the Parliament to repeal it,” Justice Khaire said, responding to the Union Government’s counsel’s plea.
Supporting the Union Government’s stand, senior advocate Desai, who represented Sarbananda Sonowal, pleaded that the case be taken up for a final hearing as all the parties have filed their affidavits. He mentioned that the Act was in implementation only in the State of Assam and nowhere else. He further reminded that the previous regime that ruled Assam had also favoured repeal of the Act and by maintained that it was up to the Government of India to repeal the Act. He told the three-member Bench that the Assam Government has since changed its submission and supports the Act. But Government of India also supports the scrapping of the Act, Desai said questioning the validity of the Act.
Advocate Desai questioned the justification of the Act asserting that Assam has become an open house and anybody can come and stay there. He further stated that the Foreigners Act should be made applicable in Assam. But joining the issue, Advocate Bhusan said that people in Delhi, even those with passports, were being deported by Delhi Police on the basis of statements by just two persons. He said that IMDT Act was Act of the Parliament and it should be made effective. He claimed that his client despite having an Indian passport, was being harassed by Delhi police and faced deportation. He advocated that the Act should be made applicable all-over the country.
Advocate Bhusan, meanwhile, is the latest to join the case, which is challenged by Assam Congress, United Minority Front (UMF), Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind. The APCC was represented by Salman Khursid and the UMF by PN Mishra and Azim Laskar. The battle-line in the case has been drawn with the BJP and AGP supporting the repeal of the Act, while the Congress party and various minority bodies opposing Sonowal’s writ petition.
The BJP, which has taken out rath yatra in Assam demanding scrapping of the Act, followed it up by having the central high command recommended the Central Government to repeal it. But this is one issue the NDA is wary of going to Parliament on because it lacks majority in Rajya Sabha. It is also hesitant to convene a joint session of the Parliament because it is not sure of the views of some of its allies in the NDA. The Supreme Court, meanwhile, in not so many words opined that the issue would be best dealt with by the Parliament.