On a petition by 94-year-old Veera Sarin, who wants the Emergency to be declared illegal, the Supreme Court has now issued notice to the Centre.
New Delhi| The apex court has agreed to examine if a simple declaration of the 1975 Emergency by the Congress government led by Indira Gandhi was unconstitutional will be feasible, NDTV reported.
On a petition by 94-year-old Veera Sarin, who wants the Emergency to be declared illegal, the Supreme Court has now issued notice to the Centre.
“We are inclined to see whether a simpliciter declaration on Emergency is feasible or desirable after passage of time,” the judges were quoted as saying.
The petitioner had asked for ₹ 25 crore as compensation, saying she and her husband were forced to leave the country because of arbitrary detention. Ms Sarin’s property was seized and appropriated and later her husband “succumbed to the pressure and died”, according to the petition.
The Supreme Court, initially, was reluctant to take up the case.
Heading the bench, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul told senior lawyer Harish Salve, representing the petitioner, “Something happened in history 45 years ago. But to go into this issue now? We are finding it difficult to entertain this plea.”
“What is not to happen, happened. We can’t keep digging on these issues, persons are gone today,” Justice Kaul added.
Abuse of power needs correction and even war crimes were still heard, Mr Salve argued.
“Certain things in history had to be revisited if a correction has to be done and the Emergency is one such issue,” he added.
“War crimes are still heard. A nascent democracy’s rights were abused for 19 months and it was a fraud on the constitution and the court must decide this and this is not a matter for political debate. The petitioner is not a political person but affected by the Emergency. The court must declare that the Emergency was illegal,” Mr Salve said.
“This plea arises from the passage of time. Mr Salve for the petitioner says that prayer survives, and wrongs of history must be corrected. We would be disinclined to reopen such aspects. After 45 years it may not be appropriate to reopen those issues. We would however be not disinclined to see whether such a simpliciter declaration, something which is feasible or desirable after the passage of time and issue. Issue notice. Petitioner to amend the petition,” the court said.
Ms Sarin had also asked for ₹ 25 crore as compensation. The court asked her to restructure her petition after she said she would not press for the money.
As an independent media platform, we do not take advertisements from governments and corporate houses. It is you, our readers, who have supported us on our journey to do honest and unbiased journalism. Please contribute, so that we can continue to do the same in future.
