Indore, Oct 25 (PTI) The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a PIL, which sought that the report of an inquiry commission set up to investigate the 2017 Mandsaur firing incident, be tabled in the state assembly.
The Indore bench of the high court, in the light of legal provisions, decided that there was no basis for issuing a court order (writ) to table the Justice Jain Commission’s inquiry report in the assembly after seven years of the firing incident.
The outer limit of six months has been fixed for placing the report before each house of Parliament or the state legislature and those six months have expired long back in the present case, it said in its order passed on October 14.
Six farmers were killed after police opened fire in Mandsaur on June 6, 2017, when they were demanding better prices for their produce.
Former Ratlam MLA Paras Saklecha said in his public interest litigation (PIL), “The Justice Jain Commission submitted the final report to the State Government on June 13, 2018. However, the State Government has not taken any action on the said report.” Under Section 3(4) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, the state government needed to table the report before the state legislature together with a memorandum of action taken thereon within the period of six months of the submission of the report by the commission, the petitioner said.
The petitioner had approached the high court by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus against the respondent to submit the report before the Principal Secretary, M P Vidhan Sabha Secretariat.
Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi of the high court dismissed the former MLA’s petition after considering the arguments and legal provisions presented by Sakclecha and the state government.
The division bench said, “If the enquiry report was not laid before the legislature, any of the members of the legislature could have demanded by raising a question before the floor of the legislature of the state as observed by the apex court.” “It is also correct that no consequence has been given in the Act if the report is not placed within a period of six months from the date of submission of the report. In the Act, the outer limit of six months has been fixed for placing the report before each house of the Parliament or the legislature of the state (as the case may be),” it said.
In the present case, those six months expired long back and the purpose of the constitution of enquiry was only to know the circumstances under which the incident took place, and to invite suggestions to stop such incidents in future, it added.
So far as the action taken by the police or the counter-action taken by the farmers was concerned, it is the subject matter of the FIR in which criminal cases have been registered by the police. In view of this, after the lapse of 6-7 years, we do not find any ground to issue a writ for placing the aforesaid report before respondent No.4. (Principal Secretary, MP Assembly secretariat), the court said. PTI HWP MAS NP
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.