This motion asserts that state police action against student protesters is constitutionally invalid unless prior judicial sanction from the High Court is obtained.
Aaj ki debate ka motion yeh hai: 'State Police Cannot Detain Student Protesters Without Prior High Court Permission' — yani kya police ko student protesters ko rokne se pehle High Court ki izaazat leni chahiye? Yeh ek gehri constitutional aur practical sawaal hai, aur main chahti hoon ki dono counsel is motion par apne tarkasangat arguments pesh karen. Toh Counsel Aarav, aap pehle apna paksh rakhiye.
My lord, main yeh opening dalil deta hoon ki State Police ko student protesters ko detain karne ka adhikar tab tak nahi hai jab tak High Court se prior permission nahi li gayi — kyunki Article 13 ke under koi bhi executive action jo fundamental rights ke viruddh ho, void hai, aur Article 226 High Court ko is jurisdiction ka guardian banata hai. Bina judicial oversight ke detention ek blanket power ban jaati hai jo constitution ke aadhe adhar ko hi khatam kar deti hai. My lord, protest karna ek constitutionally recognized expression hai, aur usse rokna seedha Article 13 ki kaseota par fail hota hai.
Ref: Constitution of India · Article 13; Constitution of India · Article 226
My Lord, main is motion ka poora vipaksh karti hoon — yeh proposition na sirf practically asamabhav hai, balki constitutionally bhi galat hai. Article 13 ke antargat koi bhi 'law' ya executive order jo Police ki vaidhaanik shakti ko — bina kisi High Court permission ke — pratighamit kare, woh fundamental rights ke derogate nahi karta; balki yeh ulta case hai ki police ki law-and-order powers CRPC ke sections se independently derived hain, aur unhe prior judicial veto se rokna khud Article 226 ki spirit ke viruddh hoga. Paksh yeh nahi bata sakta ki koi specific constitutional provision HAI jo police ko student protesters ke mamle mein prior High Court sanction lene ke liye OBLIGE karti ho — aur jab tak woh authority nahi, yeh motion ek legal fantasy hai.
Ref: Constitution of India · Article 13; Constitution of India · Article 226
My lord, vipaksh ne abhi tak yeh nahi bataya ki kis kanooni aadhar par police ko yeh blanket power milti hai ki woh student protesters ko bina kisi judicial oversight ke rok sake — Article 13 saaf kehta hai ki aisi koi bhi executive action jo fundamental rights ke khilaf ho, void hai. Detention ka yeh power, bina High Court permission ke, Article 19 aur Article 21 ke against seedha jaata hai, aur Article 13 ke under judicial review ka darvaza khulta hai. Isliye my lord, is motion ka paksh lena bilkul sahi hai — prior High Court permission ek constitutional necessity hai, koi formality nahi.
Ref: Constitution of India · Article 13
My lord, Paksh ne Article 226 ko apni taraf se pesh kiya — lekin main kahungi ki yahi provision VIPAKSH ko mazboot karti hai, kyunki High Court ka writ jurisdiction ek remedial tool hai, prior permission ka gatekeeping mechanism nahi. Article 13 saaf kehta hai ki koi bhi 'order ya notification' jo fundamental rights ke viruddh hai, void hoga — lekin detention ki sharti clearance lena khud ek aisi procedure hai jo police ki executive power ko judicially pre-empt karti hai, jiske liye koi constitutional sanction nahi. Isliye, my lord, jo motion maang raha hai — woh constitution ke structure se hi bahar hai — aur main maanti hoon ki is motion ko reject kiya jaana chahiye.
Ref: Constitution of India · Article 226; Constitution of India · Article 13
Aaj ki debate ka motion yeh hai: 'State Police Cannot Detain Student Protesters Without Prior High Court Permission' — ek important constitutional sawaal ki kya executive action ke aage judiciary ki prior approval zaroori hai. Prosecution side kahegi ki yeh fundamental rights ki raksha hai, jabki defence side kahegi ki law-and-order powers mein prior permission practically impossible hai — toh dono counsels, please apni best arguments ke saath shuru karein.