SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Jhk) 181

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAVI RANJAN, SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, JJ.
Rajan Kumar Singh, S/o. Manjusha Singh - Petitioner
Versus
State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Home Prison and Disaster Management Department - Respondent
W.P.(PIL) No.1944 of 2021
Decided On : 20-05-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Anup Kumar Agarwal, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate General, Mr.Piyush Chitresh, AC to AG.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the imposition of e-pass requirements for movement during the COVID-19 pandemic was reasonable and not arbitrary, considering the acute surge in COVID-19 cases and the limited healthcare resources.

Headnote:

e-pass - COVID-19 Restrictions - Disaster Management Act, 2005, Section 18(2)(d) - The court discussed the imposition of restrictions by the State of Jharkhand to combat the surge in COVID-19 cases. The court found that the State Government's decision to impose restrictions and require e-passes for movement was reasonable and not arbitrary, considering the acute surge in COVID-19 cases and the limited healthcare resources. The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the imposition of e-pass requirements.

Fact of the Case:

The State of Jharkhand imposed restrictions on movement and required e-passes for personal vehicle travel due to the surge in COVID-19 cases and limited healthcare resources. The petitioner, a social activist, challenged the imposition of e-pass requirements as arbitrary and filed a writ petition.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the State Government's decision to impose restrictions and require e-passes for movement was reasonable and not arbitrary, considering the acute surge in COVID-19 cases and the limited healthcare resources. The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the imposition of e-pass requirements.

Issues: The main issue was whether the imposition of e-pass requirements for movement by personal vehicle during the COVID-19 pandemic was arbitrary and violated the rights of the people.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the State Government's decision to impose restrictions and require e-passes for movement was based on the acute surge in COVID-19 cases and the limited healthcare resources, and therefore, was not arbitrary.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the imposition of e-pass requirements for movement during the COVID-19 pandemic.

JUDGMENT :

1. The matter has been taken up through video conferencing.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed by way of pro bono public praying therein for following reliefs:

    “1. (a) For an order in the nature of certiorari or any other writ/order/direction for quashing the part of memo no.234/cs/Res dated 12.05.2021 [Annexure-6] whereby mandatory condition of e-pass has been imposed for movement of general public by personal vehicle even for necessary/emergency purposes.

(b) For a writ/order declaring that the people of the state of Jharkhand can move in their locality for their basic necessary activities and survival without any requirement of pass/e-pass.

(c) For an order staying the implementation of the part of memo no.234/cs/Res dated 12.05.2021 [Annexure-6] whereby mandatory condition of e-pass has been imposed for movement of general public by personal vehicle even for necessary/emergency purposes”

3. The writ petitioner claiming himself to be a social activist has worked for the welfare of different underprivileged communities of the State of Jharkhand, especially tribal in various parts of Jharkhand. He has done Masters in Arts in Social Work from Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai.

4. It is the case of the writ petitioner that on 18.04.2021 the respondent-State of Jharkhand had issued an order in the form of guideline under the authority given to him by State Disaster Management Authority under Section 18(2) of the Disaster Management Act in order to observe the following guidelines:

    “(a) All indoor or outdoor congregations are prohibited in the state with the exception of marriage functions with the upper limit of 50 persons and last rites related functions with the upper limit of 50 persons.

(b) All processions including religious processions shall be prohibited.

(c) Not more than 5 persons shall congregate at any public place.

(d) All educations institutions including school/college/ITIs/Skill development centres/coaching class/tuition classes/training institutions shall be closed.

(e) All examinations to be conducted by various authorities of Government of Jharkhand shall be postponed.

(f) All ICDS centre shall be closed.

(g) All fairs and exhibitions are prohibited.

(h) All stadiums/gymnasiums/swimming pools/parks shall be closed.

(i) All restaurants are permitted to operate up-to-50% sitting capacity.

(j) The number of persons gathered in a religious place/place of worship shall not exceed 50% of the capacity while maintaining mandatory social distance of 2 gaz ki doori at all times.

(k) Banquet hall shall not be used for any purpose other than marriage of last rites related functions.”

5. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that the respondent-State of Jharkhand had again issued a guideline which has been named as “Swasthya Suraksha Saptah” vide memo No.250 dated 20.04.2021 which was made effective till 29.04.2021, whereby apart from the above restriction additional restrictions had been added, which read hereunder as:

    I. All shops/establishments/offices shall remain closed in the state with the exception of the following:

(a) Medicine/healthcare/medical equipment related shops.

(b) Fair price shops of Public Distribution System/

(c) Petrol Pumps/LPG/CNG outlets.

(d) Grocery (FMCG) shops. Home delivery shall be resorted to as far as possible.

(e) Whole sale/retail shops/street vendors selling fruits, vegetables, food grains, milk products, animal feed and all eatable products including sweet shops.

(f) Hotels and restaurants. Home delivery is permitted. Sit in dining is prohibited.

(g) Dhaba located on national/state highways.

(h) Unhindered transportation of all goods is permitted. Shops an establishments dealing with transportation and logistics of goods are permitted. Loading and unloading of goods is permitted.

(i) Agricultural activities are permitted. Thus all shops/establishments dealing with agriculture related items are permitted.

(j) Industrial and mining activities are permitted.

(k) Construction activities

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top