Thread by @VakashaS

UP govt issues notices to people they claim were involved in rioting, telling them to pay for the damage caused.

This is blatantly illegal. Liability can only arise AFTER a conviction.

Does the rule of law mean nothing to the Yogi Govt?

indianexpress.com/article/india/…

I know there will be some who will try to make the claim this move is in accordance with a Supreme Court judgment. It is not.

SC adopted guidelines for such events in the 2009 'In Re Destruction of Pvt & Public Properties vs State of AP' case
indiankanoon.org/doc/169453366/

As you can see from these guidelines, taken from the Thomas-Nariman Committee Report, there is no provision for asking mere accused persons to pay. Liability only arises after a determination of a nexus b/w the damage and the person. HC has to pass order after hearing parties.

Local admin is claiming (according to @IndianExpress ) to be following State Govt order based on Allahabad High Court direction - but how could HC pass direction w/o giving a hearing to the accused, as the SC guidelines mandate (see Guideline X above)?

From the UP Govt notices, you can see that they claim to be relying on directions by the Allahabad HC in its 2010 order in Mohammed Shujauddin vs State of UP (h/t @parasnsingh95 ) - see the image below.

Order available here: casemine.com/judgement/in/5…

However, if we actually look at those directions, they ONLY apply in cases where there is damage to public property during an agitation/procession "called at the invitation or instance of a political party, or a sitting or former people's representative" (see para 29).

Damages can be recovered from these political parties or persons, NOT random citizens, acc to these directions.

The notices sent out by UP admin here could've been sent to such political persons, not the embroiderers/spice sellers etc to whom they have now issued these notices.

Note: it should say Thomas-Nariman Committees' Reports in the third tweet.