On August 2, the Supreme Court postponed the hearing of Haryana’s appeal against the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s directive to unblock the Shambhu Border. The court provided time for Haryana and Punjab to propose neutral committee members to negotiate with the protesting farmers.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and R Mahadevan stressed the importance of gaining farmers’ trust and urged both states to recommend neutral individuals for the committee to address farmers’ concerns.
“We want a smooth dialogue. Please consider names of experienced and neutral personalities who can address the issue effectively,” remarked Justice Kant.
The matter was rescheduled for August 12. Following assurances from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Punjab Advocate General Gurminder Singh. They are to undertake the task of suggesting common committee members. Meanwhile, the interim arrangement of maintaining the status quo at the Shambhu border will continue.
Observation
SG Mehta informed the court about the ongoing efforts to suggest committee names. Punjab AG requested relief for vehicles permitted under the Motor Vehicles Act, a request SG Mehta objected to, stating Punjab could not make such proposals on behalf of the farmers. Justice Kant emphasised resolving the issue amicably, suggesting that emergent cases like ambulances and older citizens’ vehicles should be allowed to pass with coordination between police personnel from both states.
The case centres around the February blockade of the Shambhu border by Haryana to prevent protesting farmers from Punjab from entering. This blockade has significantly impacted the movement of citizens, especially businessmen and vendors providing essential commodities to Ambala. The High Court had previously labelled the Shambhu border as a “lifeline” for travel between Punjab, Haryana, Delhi, and Jammu & Kashmir, highlighting the inconvenience caused by its closure.
The Supreme Court had earlier proposed forming a committee of independent persons to mediate between the farmers and the government. Thus, aiming to address the “trust deficit” between the two parties. Both states were asked to suggest suitable individuals for this committee to facilitate confidence-building measures and ensure peaceful negotiations.
Background:
The Sha
mbhu border was closed by the Haryana government in February amid farmers’ protests to prevent entry from Punjab. This led to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking to reopen the border for public convenience. The High Court emphasised the importance of the Shambhu border for citizens’ movement. They directed both states to maintain law and order while restoring the highway to its original state. Despite arguments about potential protests, the court asserted that farmers should not be barred from entering Haryana. Thus, emphasising the democratic right to protest.
Another SLP by Haryana challenging the High Court’s order for a judicial inquiry into the death of a protesting farmer. Shubhkaran Singh, remains pending before the Supreme Court.
