SC frowns at political drama on scrapping of Muslim quota in Karnataka

The Supreme Court Tuesday voiced displeasure over political statements being made about withdrawal of four per cent quota for Muslims in poll bound Karnataka, after it was told Union Home Minister Amit Shah was making public statements about the hugely contentious issue at the hustings.
Terming as “inappropriate” the political statements about the matter which is sub-judice, the apex court asserted “Some sanctity needs to be maintained”.
The withdrawal of four per cent reservation for Muslims and its reallocation between the politically influential Lingayat and Vokkaliga communities just before the assembly elections has become a hot button issue in the southern state.
“When the matter is pending before the court and there is court order on Karnataka Muslim quota, then there should not be any political statements on the issue. It is not appropriate. Some sanctity needs to be maintained,” a bench of Justices KM Joseph, BV Nagarathna and Ahsanuddin Amanullah said.
Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for the petitioners who have challenged the scrapping of the Muslim quota by the state’s BJP government, said, “Every day the home minister is making statements in Karnataka that they have withdrawn the four per cent Muslim quota. Why should such statements be made?”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Karnataka government, said he is not aware of any such remarks being made. He, however, contended those criticising religion-based quota are not wrong.
“Solicitor General making a statement in the court is not a problem but someone saying anything on a sub-judice matter outside the court is not appropriate. In 1971, a West Bengal political leader was hauled up for contempt for holding a press conference defending a rationing order which was pending before the court,” Justice Joseph said.
“We understand and respect the sentiment of the court,” said Mehta but added as a counsel, “I am saying that any religion-based reservation is unconstitutional”.
Justice Nagarathna also expressed displeasure over statements being made outside the court on the quota issue.
The arguments turned bitter when Dave said statements proudly claiming credit for the withdrawal of Muslim quota were being made every day. An agitated Mehta urged the court to restrain the senior lawyer from making such statements without a context.