Bandh/ hartal (general strike), protests: India
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
Contents |
Compensation to persons hurt during bandh
Kerala govt must pay damages for hartal-related injuries: HC, January 17, 2018: The Times of India
The Kerala high court has upheld a single bench ruling that the state government is liable to pay compensation for hartal-related injury for failing to protect its citizens. The ruling by a division bench of the high court came after considering an appeal filed by the state government against the single bench’s judgment of November 11, 2016.
A vehicle driver had lost his eye due to stone pelting by an agitating mob during a hartal called by the Left Democratic Front (LDF) on July 4, 2005 to protest the industrial and labour policies of the central and state governments.
The Kerala high court directed that the state government must pay the compensation and then it must recover the amount from the political party as amount due to the state.
TN HC: Pay Rs 10L to man who lost eye during bandh
The Times of India, August 4, 2016
Pay Rs 10L to man hurt during bandh: HC to TN
Asserting that it was the Tamil Nadu government's duty to maintain law and order and protect its citizens during hartals or bandhs, the Madras high court has directed it to pay Rs 10 lakh compensation with interest to a bank employee, who lost an eye in a stone-pelting incident on the eve of a DMK bandh to protest party chief M Karunanidhi's arrest in 2001. Justice M Satyanarayanan passed the order while disposing of a petition by S Krishnaswamy, seeking a compensation of Rs 25 lakh from the state for the loss of vision and suffering caused to him by the injury inflicted on him on July 1, 2001. The petitioner stated that he underwent a surgery after the eye injuries during stone-pelting, but continued to suffer severe pain and could not continue his job as a computer operator.
Legality
Protest a constitutional right: SC
Dhananjay Mahapatra, Hartal can never be unconstitutional: SC, April 1, 2017: The Times of India
The Supreme Court refused to entertain a PIL that alleged that political organisations were resorting to hartals to hoodwink repeated judicial pronouncements banning strike and bandh calls, which paralysed normal life.
A bench of Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud said, “Hartals can never be unconstitutional.Right to protest is a valuable constitutional right. How can we say hartals are unconstitutional.“ Having failed to convince the bench to entertain the PIL, the petitioner decided to withdraw the plea.
Courts have ruled on strike, bandh and hartal calls given by political outfits for two decades now. The Kerala high court in Bharat Kumar case in 1997 had said, “When properly understood, the calling of a bandh entails the restriction of free movement of the citizen and his right to carry on his avocation and if the legislature does not make any law either prohibi ting it or curtailing it or regulating it, we think that it is the duty of the court to step in to protect the rights of the citizen so as to ensure that the freedom.“
An SC bench headed by then Chief Justice J S Verma had upheld this order.
However, over the years, the courts have not clarified the difference between strike, bandh and hartal.
