Cant allow persecution of minorities,SC tells Orissa

Directing the Orissa Government to refrain from taking a unilateral decision while considering the withdrawal of security forces from the region...

Listen to this article

00:00

1x 1.5x 1.8x

Directing the Orissa Government to refrain from taking a unilateral decision while considering the withdrawal of security forces from the region,the Supreme Court on Monday observed that it was the duty of the state to protect the minorities.

We are a secular country. And (we) cannot allow persecution of minorities, remarked one of the judges of the three-member bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan. Justice Markandeya Katju remarked,It is the duty of the state Government to protect the minority community. You have done that only after 50,000 people of the minority community fled to the jungles.

State counsel K K Venugopal,however,submitted that all the earlier court orders had been complied with,to which Justice Katju,without directly referring to attacks on Christians in the aftermath of the killing of VHP leader Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati,said,We will not accept the persecution of minority. If the Government is unable to protect them it should resign. We have to protect the minority. No minority community should feel insecure in the country, the judge further observed.

Story continues below this ad

The apex court in its earlier hearings had directed para-military forces to be stationed in the riot-hit areas till December-end in view of the perceived risk during Christmas celebrations. After some objections were raised on the withdrawal of forces,the Court restrained the state Government from taking any unilateral decision on their withdrawal and asked it to coordinate the matter with the Centre.

Counsel Colin Gonsalves representing the Archbishop of Cuttack Raphael Cheenath submitted that there had been a deceptive calm in the area after the deployment of the Central forces and also criticised the meagre compensation amount for repair of the damaged churches. The advocate argued that the State was providing only Rs 50,000 for the places of worship which were completely damaged in the fire,while the actually estimate for repair was Rs 5 to 6 lakh. Moreover,in certain cases no compensation was being considered.

The state counsel replied that the compensation was being kept on hold for certain cases of disputed land where there were issues relating to encroachment of land.