Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]Code Contextif (Configure::read('debug')) {
trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);
} else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6807622535a6f-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6807622535a6f-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6807622535a6f-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 14299, 'title' => 'Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Another appeal</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2). </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 14 April, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article3313161.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 14423, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 14299, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 14299, 'title' => 'Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Another appeal</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2). </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 14 April, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article3313161.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 14423, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 14299 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: “Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: “The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>‘Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $maxBufferLength = (int) 8192 $file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php' $line = (int) 853 $message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]Code Context$response->getStatusCode(),
($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')
));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6807622535a6f-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6807622535a6f-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6807622535a6f-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 14299, 'title' => 'Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Another appeal</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2). </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 14 April, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article3313161.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 14423, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 14299, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 14299, 'title' => 'Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Another appeal</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2). </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 14 April, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article3313161.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 14423, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 14299 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: “Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: “The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>‘Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $reasonPhrase = 'OK'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]Code Context$value
), $first);
$first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6807622535a6f-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6807622535a6f-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6807622535a6f-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6807622535a6f-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 14299, 'title' => 'Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Another appeal</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2). </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 14 April, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article3313161.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 14423, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 14299, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 14299, 'title' => 'Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Another appeal</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2). </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 14 April, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article3313161.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 14423, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 14299 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: &ldquo;Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: &ldquo;The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>&lsquo;Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: “Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: “The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>‘Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $cookies = [] $values = [ (int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8' ] $name = 'Content-Type' $first = true $value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
<head>
<link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 14299, 'title' => 'Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: “Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.” </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Another appeal</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: “The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.” </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>‘Unconstitutional'</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2). </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 14 April, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article3313161.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 14423, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 14299, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: “Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: “The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>‘Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 14299, 'title' => 'Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: “Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.” </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Another appeal</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: “The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.” </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>‘Unconstitutional'</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2). </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 14 April, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article3313161.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'supreme-court-pulls-up-kerala-for-enacting-laws-to-bypass-verdicts-j-venkatesan-14423', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 14423, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 14299 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: “Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Another appeal</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: “The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>‘Unconstitutional'</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2).</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'
include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
![]() |
Supreme Court pulls up Kerala for enacting laws to bypass verdicts-J Venkatesan |
The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for enacting legislation to circumvent its or High Court judgments. Kerala was the only State where it was telling citizens not to obey the law, said a Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave. Hearing an appeal against an interim order of the Kerala High Court staying a provision of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, the Bench asked State counsel Bina Madhavan: “Is it that your State has a pro-active legal department. Be it a Supreme Court order [in an apparent reference to the Mullaperiyar case judgment] or High Court order, you are bringing [in] legislation to overcome it.” Another appeal Counsel said that as the High Court had since struck down the provision, the State would file another appeal and both could be heard together. Justice Jain told Ms. Madhavan: “The High Court must have said it in the public interest. This [Kerala] will be the only State in the country where it is telling the citizens not to obey the law. When there is a problem for the public you are bringing in an ordinance. Particularly your State is doing. When we read [the appeal], it really pains us. The courts are active and your legal department is pro-active. We felt so saddened.” The Bench directed that both appeals be listed for hearing on April 30. ‘Unconstitutional' A Division Bench of the High Court had struck down as unconstitutional Section 5(1) (c) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act that empowered district police chiefs to grant permission for holding public meetings and assemblies on public roads and road margins. As per the Full Court verdict, processions and demonstrations could be allowed on one side of the road, leaving out the other side for traffic and pedestrian movement and the provision was inserted to find a way around this judgment. The High Court held that the fundamental rights under Article 19(1) (a) and (b) (freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peaceably without arms) had to be synchronised with the right under Article 19(1) (d) (to move freely throughout the territory of India). This would be possible only by prohibiting assemblies and meeting on public roads and such restriction was justified under Article 19(2). It noted that no survey was conducted to identify whether any road margin was suitable or sufficient for holding public meetings and if so, the number of people who could gather there. The road margins were encroached upon by the people and even electricity and water connections given to the encroachers. Hence there was no justification for upholding Section 5(1) (c) of the Act, it held. The court had earlier stayed the operation of the Act and the present appeal in the Supreme Court was directed against the interim order.
|