Two crucial SC observations echo overall public sentiment in India

The Supreme Court of India has made significant observations in two separate cases that resonate with the prevailing public sentiment emphasising national unity and security.​ Interestingly, they come in the wake of the cowardly Pahalgam massacre on April 22 that claimed 26 lives, majority of them tourists.

Sample this: when a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a judicial probe into the Pahalgam terror attack was brought before the Supreme Court on May 1 with petitioners requesting a judicial probe headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to investigate the incident.

The Court on Thursday not only declined to entertain the plea, but also raised concerns that such actions could demoralise the armed forces at this critical time when India is in mourning and is faced with rising tensions with Pakistan – which, intelligence agencies confirm, routinely hires, trains and dispatches terror squads into India to wage a low-intensity war.

This the case of the Pahalgam massacre, what is worse is that the terrorists targeted males among tourists after identifying their faith to make sure that they were non-Muslims before they were shot dead, mostly point-blank.

It is in this context that Justice Surya Kant comments need to be viewed. He said to the petitioners, “This is a crucial hour when each and every citizen of this country has joined hands to fight terrorism. Don’t demoralise our forces by filing such petitions” . The court also emphasised the importance of national unity and cautioned against actions that might undermine the morale of security personnel.​

In fact, several days ago, in a separate matter, the Supreme Court addressed pleas related to the alleged use of Pegasus spyware for surveillance. The court, while categorically stating that individual concerns about privacy must be addressed, also explained that the broader implications of national security take precedence. Justice Surya Kant said, “Yes, individual apprehension must be addressed, but it cannot be made a document for discussion on the streets.” The Court further said that there is nothing inherently wrong with the country using spyware for national security purposes, meaning against terrorists and such wrongdoers. It had concerns only with such apps being not misused against civil society members.​

Without doubt, the Supreme Court’s observations in these two cases clearly reflect that it is attuned to the nation’s collective consciousness in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror strike that saw countries worldwide offering condolences and some of them, especially powerful countries in the West, offering unconditional support to India to end cross-border terrorism, especially those targeting civilians.

Again, the observations by the apex court are to seen as in line with the public’s desire for a united response against terrorism, which in the latest case in Kashmir, affected the lives of tourists who visited the holiday destination in Kashmir from across the country.

Invariably, these judicial positions put the spotlight on a broader narrative – that in moments of national crisis, the need to maintain unity and support for security institutions becomes crucial.

In that sense, the Supreme Court’s latest observations reflect an overall resolve – as well as sentiment – among the people to tide over any threat to the country’s integrity and to ensure peace.

Kashmirnational securityNews BriefPahalgamSupreme Court of Indiaterror attackWeb Exclusive