Jarange’s lawyer, Satish Maneshinde, claimed 90 per cent of protestors had left and sought time until Wednesday, assuring no untoward incidents would occur.
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday slammed the Maharashtra government for its failure to remove protesters from Azad Maidan during the ongoing Maratha reservation protests. The court observed that the site could have been vacated “forcefully” to comply with earlier court directions and prevent inconvenience to the public.
Maratha quota activist Manoj Jarange started an indefinite fast at Azad Maidan on Friday last week. Thousands of his supporters, who had assembled in Mumbai, blocked roads and railway stations causing major convenience to regular commuters in Mumbai.
While hearing a PIL on the inconvenience caused by Maratha reservation protests, the bench of Acting Chief Justice S.V. Chandrashekhar and Justice Aarti Sathe, questioned the State’s reliance on protest leader Manoj Jarange’s influence to normalise the situation instead of enforcing court orders.
On Monday, the High Court had expressed displeasure over Maratha protestors causing widespread disruption in South Mumbai instead of restricting themselves to the designated protest site ‘Azad Maidan’. After the court’s ultimatum to vacate city roads, Jarange appealed to his supporters to respect the court order after which many of his supporters cleared roads and CSMT railway station.
Advocate General Dr. Birendra Saraf, appearing for the State, submitted that police had made announcements and put up banners, but gatherings continued and only Jarange’s appeal could disperse the remaining protestors.
However, the court was not impressed by the State’s submission. The Chief Justice rebuked this approach and said, “So you are relying on his popularity? Why can’t you implement our orders? It is your duty. Why didn’t you inform the court that the number of participants had increased from 5,000 to over a lakh? We will have to pass orders against you too. You could have taken all necessary steps. You could have vacated the site forcefully. This is a very serious issue. We are unhappy with your conduct.”
Jarange’s lawyer, Satish Maneshinde, claimed 90 per cent of protestors had left and sought time until Wednesday, assuring no untoward incidents would occur. The court questioned why Jarange was still camped there despite permission only for 24 hours. The bench warned, “You cannot override court orders by continuing to sit there. We may be forced to act to uphold the rule of law.”
The court noted that Jarange’s continued presence and mass influence could not justify disobedience, especially while the reservation challenge remains pending. It also indicated Jarange could be held responsible for instigating the crowd beyond permitted limits. The matter was adjourned to Wednesday at 1 PM.
