New Delhi: Someone cannot be denied on the foundation of his fundamental rights to live or move freely anywhere in the country, the Supreme Court said.
Observations by benches consisting of Indira Judge Banerjee and V Ramasubramanian arrived while setting aside the existent order of journalists and social workers issued by the District Authority in Amravati, Maharashtra.
“Someone cannot be rejected by his fundamental rights to live anywhere or move freely throughout the country, with a thin reason,” Bench said.
Existence orders prevent the movement of someone in a certain area.
The Supreme Court said the existing drastic action must only be taken in extraordinary cases to maintain the law and order.
DCP, ZONE1, Amravati City, has passed the existent order under the police law Maharashtra, 1951, directed Journalists of Rahmat Khan not to enter or return to Amravati City or Rural District Amravati for one year from the date where it went or was released.
Khan has submitted an application under RTI, looking for information from the authorities for alleged illegality in disbursing funds to various madrasas.
He argued that cases were initiated against him as a cociperblast for the steps taken by him to end the alleged misuse of public funds and to begin actions against those involved in illegal practice
The right to stay, moving freely cannot be rejected for thin reasons: SC
