High Court stresses action against YPS Mohali roadblock protesters misusing religious symbols

The Punjab and Haryana High Court have taken a significant stance on a longstanding issue regarding encroachments around YPS Chowk in Mohali, noting that the presence of protesters using religious symbols does not exempt them from legal action. The case stems from a petition filed over a year ago by the Arrive Safe Society of […]

by Taruni Gandhi - April 13, 2024, 11:08 am

The Punjab and Haryana High Court have taken a significant stance on a longstanding issue regarding encroachments around YPS Chowk in Mohali, noting that the presence of protesters using religious symbols does not exempt them from legal action.

The case stems from a petition filed over a year ago by the Arrive Safe Society of Chandigarh, represented by its president Harman Singh Sidhu, against the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the state of Punjab. The petition highlights the inconvenience faced by local residents and commuters due to an ongoing protest/morcha that began in January 2023.

Among the demands of the protesters are the release of Sikh prisoners, including Balwant Singh Rajoana and Devinderpal Singh Bhullar, both of whom are convicted in high-profile cases. Despite repeated opportunities, neither Punjab nor Chandigarh has addressed the issues faced by commuters, as stated by the division bench of Acting Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Lapita Banerji.

The bench expressed concern over the prolonged inconvenience caused to commuters and residents of the Tricity due to road blockages. It emphasized that hiding behind religious symbols does not justify the misuse of religious sentiments to obstruct public spaces.
Moreover, the bench noted the absence of a large gathering at the protest site and criticized the delay in resolving the issue, especially considering the opportune time for action given the ongoing harvesting season.

Referencing previous legal precedents, the court urged Punjab and Chandigarh to take prompt action in line with the observations of the Supreme Court. The proceedings have been deferred to April 18, with the expectation that authorities will address the matter with urgency and adherence to legal principles.