Factual Background 

In the instant matter at hand Association For Protection of Civil Rights v. State of Uttarakhand a Hindu Maha Panchayat filed a Public Interest Litigation suit on behalf of the state’s religious and cultural heritage. Allegedly, posters were placed in a number of stores run by the local minority community. It was anticipated that there might be widespread communal violence in the area as a result of the same. In order to ensure the security of life, liberty, and property of all residents, the petitioner asked that the respondent-State be instructed to take decisive action that would persist for a long time in order to prevent, control, and limit the potential escalation of widespread communal violence and related crimes. The petitioner also requested instructions for the registration of FIRs against the individuals who are accountable for the communication dated June 5, 2023, which was issued on the letterhead of the Bajrang Dal of Uttarkashi and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, as well as against the individual who posted on social media using the handle “Dev Bhoomi Raksha Abhiyan.” While the Court was deliberating the current PIL, it was told that the aforementioned Hindu Maha Panchayat had been cancelled thanks to State involvement.

Analysis of Court order 

The State has been ordered to make sure that law and order are maintained throughout the State by the Divisional Bench of the Uttarakhand High Court, which is comprised of Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Rakesh Thapliyal. The Court declared that it was unwilling to direct the filing of an FIR because it deemed it improper. The Court further stated that the investigation into whether any cognizable offence has been disclosed is first and foremost the responsibility of the police and that even if the police do not take any action, the Magistrate in question is responsible for investigating the matter in proceedings under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The Court noted that it is the state’s primary responsibility to ensure that there is no loss of life or property of any individual in the state, and that law, order, and peace are maintained throughout the entire state. As a result, the Court instructed the respondent to take whatever actions are required to fulfil the State’s fundamental duty to maintain peace. The Court further ordered the State to make sure that any potential for violence of any type is properly assessed before allowing the convening of any public gatherings or crowds of persons within the State.