The Supreme Court has made very strong comments about the agricultural laws. The court has said that it is very disappointed with the central government in this case.
During the hearing, CJI SA Bobde took a very strong stance and said, “We asked you last time but you did not reply. Things are constantly worsening, people are committing suicide and they are sitting in the cold. Tell us if you cannot hold these laws then we will do so. What is the problem in stopping them? ‘
During the hearing on December 17, CJI Bobde had asked the Central Government to consider whether agricultural laws can be held. On this, it was said from the Center that this cannot be done. Several petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court for the removal of farmers from the borders of Delhi.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Central Government, said that he has come to many farmers organizations who have said that these laws are better. He said that the remaining farmers have no problem. On this, CJI Bobde said that no such petition has come to him stating that these laws are good.
CJI Bobde said that we are unable to understand why the elderly and women are involved in the demonstration.
During the hearing on January 6, the apex court had expressed concern about the farmers’ movement and said that there was no change in the situation. The court had also said that it understood the situation of the farmers. Several petitions have also been filed in the Supreme Court regarding the removal of farmers from the borders of Delhi.
Supreme Court intervention
Prior to the hearing, the All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee has refused to accept the government’s suggestion that they take these laws to the Supreme Court. The farmers have warned that if the central government does not cancel these laws, then they will close all the borders of Delhi. The committee has said that the government should decide on its own without the intervention of the Supreme Court. The committee has alleged that the government is using the Supreme Court as a political shield.