The Supreme Court of India on Monday declined to entertain petitions filed against Himanta Biswa Sarma over a controversial viral video allegedly showing him firing a rifle, directing the petitioners instead to approach the Gauhati High Court. The court emphasised that litigants must not undermine the authority of constitutional courts at the state level by directly approaching the apex court in politically sensitive matters.
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi made the observations while hearing pleas seeking action against the Assam Chief Minister.
During the hearing, the bench remarked that it had become a “disturbing trend” for litigants to directly move the Supreme Court without first approaching high courts. The judges observed that such practices risk weakening the federal judicial structure and depriving high courts of significant constitutional litigation.
“Why haven’t you gone to the Gauhati High Court? Don’t undermine its authority,” the bench said, adding that the Supreme Court cannot become a forum for every politically sensitive dispute, especially in the run-up to elections.
The court also noted that high courts have increasingly been deprived of important environmental and commercial matters as litigants bypass them and approach the apex court directly. While declining to hear the petitions, the bench requested the Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court to ensure an expedited hearing if the matter is filed there and urged all parties to exercise restraint within the boundaries of constitutional morality.
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the case involved alleged violations of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution and warranted intervention under Article 32. He also sought a probe by a Special Investigation Team (SIT), describing Sarma as a “habitual and repeated” offender.
However, the bench cautioned against what it termed “convenience forum shopping,” observing that litigants often approach the Supreme Court simply because senior lawyers are based in Delhi. The judges highlighted that Article 226 empowers citizens to seek remedies from their nearest high court, reinforcing access to justice at the regional level.
Rejecting suggestions to transfer the matter to another high court, the bench reiterated that constitutional remedies should ordinarily begin at the appropriate jurisdictional forum. “We are not saying we don’t have jurisdiction. If you don’t succeed, come here,” the court said.
The controversy stems from a video shared on social media platform X (formerly Twitter) by the Assam unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party, purportedly showing Sarma aiming and firing a rifle at individuals belonging to a particular community. The video quickly sparked political backlash, with opposition parties accusing the Chief Minister of attempting to polarise the atmosphere ahead of the upcoming Assam Assembly elections.
Amid mounting criticism, the video was subsequently deleted by the party’s state unit.
The legal battle is now expected to shift to the Gauhati High Court, where petitioners may seek judicial scrutiny of the allegations and relief under constitutional provisions. The Supreme Court’s order underscores its continued emphasis on judicial discipline and the primacy of high courts within India’s constitutional framework.
Leave Your Comment