SC refuses to entertain 'point-blank shot' plea against Assam CM, cites HC route

New Delhi, Feb 16: The Supreme Court has declined to entertain petitions seeking action against Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma over the "point-blank shot" video and directed the petitioners to approach the Gauhati High Court instead.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi questioned why the petitioners had bypassed the High Court.

“Why haven't you gone to the Gauhati High Court? Don't undermine its authority. Will ask parties to use restraint and remain within the boundaries of constitutional morality, but this is becoming a trend just before the polls,” the bench reportedly observed.

Calling it a “disturbing trend”, the apex court said, “Every matter ends up here. We have already deprived high courts of environmental and commercial litigations.”

The Supreme Court also requested the Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court, Ashutosh Kumar, to expedite the hearing if the matter is filed there.

During the hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the case warranted the Supreme Court’s intervention under Article 32 of the Constitution.

Legal web portal Live Law quoted Singhvi as submitting, “If the constitutional and social fabric of this country is threatened, shouldn’t Article 32 be invoked? He is brazenly speaking against an entire community.”

He also said he had cited 17 instances where the apex court directly entertained matters in “lesser cases".

Singhvi described Sarma as a “habitual offender” and contended that there was no FIR registered against him despite the gravity of the allegations.

He further suggested that the petitioners be allowed to approach a High Court outside Assam,  a submission that drew sharp response from the bench.

“This is a very unfortunate submission, I outrightly reject this,” the CJI said, adding, “We have to deal with our own arrears. The entire effort is to demoralize High Courts. There's a very calculated move to undermine High Courts.”

Advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for some of the petitioners, submitted that the High Court might have to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising officers from outside Assam.

The CJI responded that the High Court is competent to pass such directions and recalled that he himself had issued similar orders while serving as a High Court judge. “Go through the channel, trust the High Court, approach them,” the CJI remarked.

Senior Advocate Chander Uday Singh, representing four eminent Assamese individuals, informed the bench that they had written a letter to the Gauhati High Court Chief Justice seeking suo motu intervention but no action followed.

The CJI clarified that writing a letter and formally filing a petition were two different processes.

After dictating the order, Singh requested the bench to make general observations on the need for restraint by constitutional functionaries.

The CJI declined, stating, “We can't comment as we have taken the view that this should go to HC. Have some system which is in built, let's respect the system that constitutional framework provides.”

The controversy stems from a video shared on February 7 by the Assam BJP on its official X handle, purportedly showing Sarma aiming and firing a rifle at two individuals, one wearing a skull cap and another with a beard.

The post triggered widespread political condemnation, with Opposition parties alleging attempts at communal polarisation. The BJP later deleted the video.

Separate pleas have been filed by CPI(M) leaders and CPI leader Annie Raja seeking registration of FIRs against Sarma and constitution of an independent SIT, arguing that a fair probe could not be expected from state or central agencies.

Earlier, the top court on February 10 agreed to consider listing a plea of Left leaders seeking action against Sarma.

It took note of the submissions of lawyer Nizam Pasha, appearing for a few CPI and CPI(M) leaders, against Sarma and said it will consider listing the plea.

Previously, a separate petition was also filed by 12 people on the issue, seeking directions to prevent divisive comments by persons holding constitutional posts.

With the Supreme Court declining to intervene at this stage, the legal challenge is now set to move before the Gauhati High Court.

With inputs from PTI