KOSHY JACOB versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2017] 11 S.C.R. 235 · Decided: 28-11-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, UDAY UMESH LALIT · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] 11 S.C.R. 235 
KOSHY JACOB 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 55 of2013) 
NOVEMBER 28, 2017 
[ADARSH KUMAR GOEL AND UDAY UMESH LALIT, JJ.J 
A 
B 
Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 - Writ 
petition seeking direction for implementation of guidelines issued 
by this Court in *Destruction of Public and Private Properties case -
c 
Grievance of petitioner was that large number of strikes/agitations 
rern/t in destruction of puh/ic property and also violation of 
jimdamenta/ right of the people for which suitable remedy is not 
available to the aggrieved victims - Committee appointed by the 
Supreme Court recommended statuto1:v amendments for making those 
sponsoring such agitations accou/1/ab/e and punishable under the D 
cri111inal lalv - Holvever, inspite of such recon1111e11clatio11s, no 
legislation or speedy mechanism has been put in place so far - In 
reply affidavit by Union of India. ii was submilled that the process 
has been initiated for amendment of the Prevention of Damage to 
Public Property Act - In view of the stand taken by Union of India, 
it is expected that the law proposed will be brought into force within 
reasonable time to address all concerned issues - Writ petition 
accordingly disposed of 
*Destruction of Public and Private Properties, In Re ~: 
State of Andhra Pradesh and Others (2009) 5 SCC 212 : 
(20091 6 SCR 439 - referred to. 
Case l,a\V Reference 
(2009] 6 SCR 439 
referred to 
Pnra 2 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 
E 
F 
55 of20l3. 
G 
Under Article 32 of the Constitution oflndia. 
K.K. Venugopal,AG, Shiv Mangal Sharma, D. K. Thakur,AAGs, 
Wi\ls Mathew, Adolf Mathew, Ms. Usha Nandini. V, Biju P. Raman, 
Ms. Binu Tamta, Ms. Madhvi Diwan, Rohit Bhatt, B. V. Balramdas, 
235 
H 
• 
236 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] II S.C.R. 
B. Krishna Prasad, Ms. Nandini Sen, Chanchal Kumar Ganguli, Mishra 
Saurabh, Ankit Kr. Lal, Shibashish Misra, Ms. Sylona Mohapatra, 
M. Yogesh Kanna, Ms. Sujatha Bagadhi. Ms. Aruna Mathur, Avneesh 
Arputham, Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Ms. Simran Jeet (For Mis. Arputham 
ArunaAnd Co.), Dr. Monika Gusain, Manpreet Kaur Bhalla, Ms. Geeta 
Singh, S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Mrityunjal Singh, G M. Kawoosa, M. 
Shoeb Alam, Nishe Raj en Shonker, Ms. Anu K. Joy, Reegan S. Bee, 
Ms. Rachana Srivastava. Prateek Dwivedi, Ms. Monika, Sukrit R. 
Kapoor, Pragyan Pradip Sharma, Nilcsh Y. Ukcy, P. V. Yogcswaran, 
Vivek R. Mohanty, Mil ind Kumar, V. N. Raghupathy, Parikshit P. Angadi, 
Ms. Hcmantika Wahi, Ms. Jcsal Wahi, Ms. Puja Singh, Ms. Shodhika 
Sharma, Ms. $eema Sharma, Varinder Kumar Sharma, Ms. K. Enatoli 
Serna, Edward Behlo, Amit Kumar Singh, K. Luikang Michael, Z. H. 
Isaac Haiding, Nishant R. Katneshwarkar, Ms. Dccpa M. Kulkarni, Ms. 
Abha R. Sharma, D.S. Pamar,Ms. Sujeeta Srivastava, Dcbojit Borkakati, 
Shuvodeep Roy, Gopal Singh, Rituraj Biswas, Abid Ali Beeran P, Ms. 
Pragati Ncekhra, Avijit Bhattacharjec, Ms. Asha Gopalan Na.ir, Balaji 
Srinivasan, Sunil Fernandes,Advs. for the appearing parties. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered: 
ORDER 
I. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 
2. This petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution oflndia, 
seeks direction for implementation of guidelines issued by this Court in 
Destruction of Public and Private Properties. In Re v. State of Andhra 
Pradesh and Others, (2009) 5 SCC 212. 
3. According to the averments in the petition, the petitioner is an 
advocate. He was forced to spend more than 12 how-son road to reach 
his home after being discharged from hospital after surgery on 23n1 May, 
2012, on account of an on-going agitation. According to the petitioner, 
large number of strikes/agitations have taken place resulting in destruction 
of public property and also resulting in violation offundamental right of 
the people for which suitable remedy is not available to the aggrieved 
victims. 
4. Committees appointed by this Court in the above case 
recommended statutory amendments for making those sponsoring such 
agitations accountable and punishable under the criminal law and also 
KOSHY JACOB v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
237 
requiring preventive and remedial actions such as videography of all the 
A 
activities and award for damages. In spite of such recommendations, no 
legislation or speedy mechanism has been put in place so far which 
appears to be the reason for this petition. 
5. In pursuance of notice issued by t
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.