News Analysis India

Tag: Tablighi Jamaat

  • Tablighi matter: SC asks authorities to examine future visa applications of blacklisted foreigners

    By PTI

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Thursday directed the authorities to examine future applications for a grant of visa to be filed by those foreigners, who were blacklisted from travelling to India for 10 years for alleged involvement in Tablighi Jamaat activities, on a case-to-case basis in accordance with the law.

    The apex court was hearing the pleas, including those challenging the orders blacklisting several citizens of 35 countries from travelling to India for 10 years for alleged involvement in Tablighi Jamaat activities.

    A bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar noted that solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, has in “all fairness” submitted that separate blacklisting order has not been served on the petitioners or similarly placed persons.

    “In that view of the matter, we direct the concerned authorities to examine the future applications for grant of visa to be made by the petitioners or similarly placed persons on a case-to-case basis in accordance with the law, uninfluenced by the stand taken by the respondents in the reply affidavit filed before this court,” the bench, which also comprised Justices A S Oka and J B Pardiwala, said.

    The top court said that while considering such applications, it would be open to the authorities to take into account all aspects of the matter as may be permissible in law.

    The bench observed that though several questions of law were raised before it by both sides, “we do not wish to dilate on those matters in the peculiar facts of the present case inasmuch as the petitioners before us have already left India consequent to cancellation of visa”.

    It said the only issue which remains is about the blacklisting order passed by the concerned authorities, as stated in the reply affidavit filed earlier before the court on behalf of the Union of India.

    The bench observed that the petitioners’ have said that no blacklisting order has been served on them or other similarly placed persons.

    It noted that the reply affidavit refers to the factum of issuance of blacklisting order, but such order has not been produced on record before the court.

    “The affidavit filed by the respondents does indicate that individual orders of blacklisting have been passed and would be served on the concerned persons at the time of their exit from India,” it noted.

    The bench said the case of the petitioners is that the order has not been served on them at the time of exit or otherwise.

    In its order, the bench made it clear that it is not dilating on the questions agitated before the court by both sides, including on the maintainability of the petitions.

    The Centre had on Wednesday argued that the petitions per se are “not maintainable” and entry into any sovereign country can never be an enforceable fundamental right.

    Mehta had said that the right to enter a sovereign country, contrary to the law of that nation, can never be traceable to Article 21 of the Constitution.

    He had suggested that petitioners can make a representation to the authority.

    Mehta had argued that Tablighi activity is prohibited by several countries in various parts of the world and since 2003, India has also prohibited this.

    The Centre had earlier told the apex court that the right to deny or grant a visa is the executive decision and the government is trying to find a solution so that the national interest and the interest of the foreigners are protected.

    The petitioners’ counsel had argued that they have no dispute over India’s right to reject or grant a visa and the problem was that of blacklisting which has been done for 10 years and applies to those also who have been discharged or acquitted by the courts in Tablighi Jamaat congregation case during COVID-19 in 2020.

    Earlier, the Centre had requested the bench to examine the question regarding the scope of the rights of a foreign national to approach the local courts in a matter of violation of visa conditions.

    In January this year, the solicitor general had told the bench that a very important “constitutional question” arises for consideration which relates to the rights of a foreigner concerning visa restrictions.

    The apex court was hearing pleas filed by several foreigners who have challenged the Centre’s orders blacklisting more than 2,700 citizens of 35 countries from travelling to India for 10 years for alleged involvement in Tablighi Jamaat activities.

    The Centre had earlier sought dismissal of the pleas and informed the top court in July 2020 that it had issued individual orders on a case-to-case basis for cancellation of visas and blacklisting of 2,765 foreign nationals.

    As per the information available, 205 FIRs have been lodged against the foreign Tablighi Jamaat members by 11 states and 2,765 such foreigners have been blacklisted so far, the Centre had said in its affidavit filed earlier in the top court.

    Some of the petitions have contended that en-masse blacklisting of foreigners without any opportunity to defend themselves is a blatant violation of Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution.

  • Can’t re-open Nizamuddin Markaz, few may offer Shab-e-Barat, Ramzan prayers, Centre tells HC 

    By PTI

    NEW DELHI: The Centre Friday opposed before the Delhi High Court fully re-opening the Nizamuddin Markaz, where the Tablighi Jamaat congregation was held in March 2020 amid the COVID19 pandemic and has remained shut since then, stating that a few people may be allowed to offer prayers on the upcoming religious occasions.

    Government counsel Rajat Nair told Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri, who was hearing a plea by the Delhi Waqf Board to open the mosque in view of Shab-e-Barat and Ramzan in March and April, that the mosque is a case property and the petitioner board has no locus to seek its re-opening.

    Nair said that on earlier occasions, a concession was given to allow a few people to offer prayers subject to conditions and there was no objection with respect to such arrangement this time as well.

    The counsel appearing for the petitioner said that the mosque, which is under the lock of Delhi Police, should be opened as the Delhi Disaster Management Authority has now lifted all restrictions that were imposed on account of the pandemic.

    The judge listed the case for hearing next week and asked the petitioner to bring the DDMA order on record.

    Several FIRs were registered under the Epidemic Diseases Act, the Disaster Management Act, Foreigners Act and various provisions of the penal code in connection with the Tablighi Jamaat event held at the Nizamuddin Markaz and the subsequent stay of foreigners there during the COVID-19 lockdown last year.

    In its application filed through advocate Waqeeh Shafiq, the petitioner has said that last year during these two occasions — Shab-e-Barat and Ramzan, the high court had permitted prayers in the mosque.

    It has said the current strain of COVID-19, Omicron, was not as severe and fatal as the Delta variant and as the conditions have improved, physical hearings of all courts have resumed, schools, clubs, bars and markets have also reopened, therefore, there is no impediment to direct reopening of this waqf property.

    The application was filed in the Board’s petition which has sought the reopening of the premises and contended that even after unlock-1 guidelines permitted religious places outside containment zones to be opened, the Markaz — comprising the Masjid Bangle Wali, Madarsa Kashif-ul-uloom and attached hostel — continues to be locked up.

    It has stated that even if the premises was part of any criminal investigation or trial, keeping it “under lock as an out of bound area” was a “primitive method” of enquiry process.

    Last year, the court had questioned the Centre as to how long it intended to keep the Nizamuddin Markaz locked, saying it can’t be “kept forever”.

    In its affidavit affirmed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime, the Centre has told the court that it was “necessary and incumbent” to “preserve” the Markaz property as the investigation in the case registered for violation of the COVID19 protocols has cross borders implications and involves nation’s diplomatic relations with other countries.

    On April 15, 2021, the court had allowed 50 people to offer namaz five times a day at Nizamuddin Markaz during Ramzan, saying there is no direction in the DDMA notification to close down places of worship.

  • UP: Bareilly court acquits 12 Tablighi Jamaat members, including nine Thais

    By PTI

    BAREILLY: Twelve members of Tablighi Jamaat, including nine Thai nationals, were acquitted for lack of evidence by a local court here on Friday, officials said.

    Defence counsel Milan Kumar Gupta said that a case was lodged against 12 members of the Tablighi Jamaat, including the nine Thai nationals, two persons from Tamil Nadu, and one local.

    They were arrested last year from a mosque in Shahjahanpur allegedly for violation of pandemic guidelines.

    A case was registered against them at Sadar police station in Shahjahanpur under various sections of the IPC, Epidemic Act, Disaster Management Act, Foreigners Act and Passport Act.

    The hearing of the case was held in Bareilly.

    Gupta said during the hearing of the case, the members of the Tablighi Jamaat pleaded innocence.

    A spate of cases was registered against members of Tablighi Jamaat after it held a meeting at a markaz in Nizamuddin area in Delhi last March.

    The meeting was attended by people from different countries including Indonesia and Thailand.

  • COVID-19: Nine foreigners of Tablighi Jamaat discharged

    By PTI
    LUCKNOW: A Lucknow court has discharged nine foreigners belonging to Tablighi jamaat from the cases lodged against them during the Covid outbreak in the country.

    The nine had been booked for allegedly committing various penal offences and breaching provisions of the Foreigners Act and Epidemic Act.

    While discharging the nine, Chief Judicial Magistrate Sushil Kumari, however, stipulated that their bail bonds and personal bonds would be discharged only after the appropriate action by the Central government.

    She also clarified that the accused foreigners would be entitled to their passports and mobile phones only after the conclusion of proceedings pending before the Central government.

    The discharged foreigners are Mohammad Madali, Hasan Pancho, Sithipanglimsiripat, Suraskalamulsak, Arsen Thomya, Romlikole, Abdullah Maming, Abdul Basir Idorothai and Apdunbahav Vimuteekaan.

    All the accused had earlier been granted bail.

    In the order, the judge said that there was no prima-facie evidence against them to make them face trial.

    The court passed the order on the discharge application moved by the accused foreigners.

  • UP court slaps fine on 49 foreign nationals for taking part in Tablighi Jamaat event

    By PTI
    LUCKNOW: A court here on Wednesday imposed a fine of Rs 1,500 each on 49 foreign nationals for taking part in a Tablighi Jamaat event in Delhi during the COVID-19 pandemic last year.

    Police had registered cases at different police stations in Lucknow and other districts under various IPC sections and the Epidemic Diseases Act.

    The 49 foreign nationals pleaded that they all were tourists and had come to India on valid visas.

    Chief Judicial Magistrate Sushil Kumari has imposed a fine of Rs 1,500 on each of them.

  • SC says control important over TV programmes having ‘instigating effect’, like ‘lathis’ to cops

    By PTI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Thursday said control over TV programmes having “instigating effect” is as important as providing “lathis” to policemen for law and order, and slammed the Centre for “doing nothing” to curb such shows.

    Hearing a plea on the media reporting issue in the Tablighi Jamaat case, a bench headed by Chief Justice S A Bobde also referred to the internet shutdown in some areas of Delhi on January 26 when the tractor parade by farmers protesting against three new farm laws turned violent, leaving 300 policemen and scores of others injured.

    “Fair and truthful reporting is normally not a problem. Problem is when it is used to agitate others. It is as important as providing ‘lathis’ to policemen. It is an important preventive part of the law and order situation,” said the bench, also comprising Justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian.

    Appearing for the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that there are effective mechanisms in place to prevent spread of hate news.

    The CJI then told Mehta: “The fact of the matter is that there are programmes which have instigating effect and you being the government is doing nothing about it” the bench told Mehta.

    “Control over some news is as important as some preventive measure and check law and order situation. I don’t know why you are blind to this. I don’t mean anything offensive but you are doing nothing about it”.

    Mehta pointed out that the problem arises during live, discussion-based programmes, as there cannot be pre-censorship of such programmes.

    The bench said: “We are not interested in what the people say on TV.

    They can say anything these days and use any tone on TV but as long as they do not instigate, incite violence, we have no problem with that.

    We are interested in broadcasts or programmes which have instigation effect and there are situations when it can cause riots, and there can be loss of life, property”.

    Mehta agreed with the bench and said that sometimes it is done “deliberately” but sometimes it is “unfortunate”.

    The top court made the observations while hearing a batch of pleas which have raised the issue of media reporting of Tablighi Jamaat congregation here last year during the onset of COVID-19 pandemic.

    The congregation at Nizamuddin Markaz in the national capital in March last year, attended by thousands of Indian and foreign nationals, was cited as being responsible for accelerating the spread of coronavirus or COVID-19, with its attendees allegedly carrying the infection to different parts of the country.

    The bench told Mehta, “Yesterday, you shut down the internet and mobile because of the farmers’ visit to Delhi. These are problems that can arise anywhere. I don’t know what happened on the TV yesterday”.

    When Mehta objected to the word “farmers’ visit” saying it cannot be called visit, the CJI said, “I am deliberately using the non-controversial term”.

    The Solicitor General said that during a terrorist attack, some TV channels even gave information about movement of forces by telecasting the details of security forces.

    The CJI referring to the 26/11 terror attack in Mumbai said, “I was a judge at that time in Bombay High Court”.

    He told the bench that there are self-regulatory bodies like the broadcaster associations and News Broadcasters Standards Authority (NBSA) also has its own system.

    Counsel for NBSA said that whenever they receive any complaint, they act upon it and ask the channel to air an apology and no programme is allowed to be broadcast which violates the programme code.

    Mehta added that “Now, we are in the era of OTT. There was DTH, cable service etc too. We can give details of all the systems including the legal system in place”.

    The bench asked all the parties to file their affidavits, if any, in the matter within three weeks and said the matter will be heard thereafter.

    “List these matters on a non-miscellaneous day after three weeks for hearing. In the meantime, all the affidavits, if any, may be filed by the parties,” the bench said in its order.

    In November last year, the apex court had expressed displeasure over the Centre’s affidavit in the case and said that the government should consider setting up a regulatory mechanism to deal with such contents on TV.

    Observing that the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting’s affidavit did not deal with the applicability of Cable Television Network Act (CTNA) in the case, the top court had said that the government has the power to put a regulatory mechanism in place and it cannot be left to an agency like NBSA.

    The top court, which was hearing the pleas filed by Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind and others alleging that a section of the media was spreading communal hatred over Tablighi Jamaat congregation during the onset of pandemic, had asked the Centre to file a fresh affidavit dealing with mechanism to regulate electronic media under the CTNA.

    The plea filed by Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind has sought directions to the Centre to stop dissemination of “fake news” related to the Nizamuddin congregation and take strict action against those responsible for it.