Mass Disinfection In Barielly: Legal Angle

INTRODUCTION AND DETAILS OF THE EVENT.

The poor migrant laborers who managed to travel to their home towns in Uttar Pradesh, were welcomed with a “chemical bath” when they reached Bareilly, This incident on the sixth day of the 21-day lockdown and the stories of migrant workers continue to shatter our hearts, some employees took an overzealous and intrusive steps and sprayed Sodium hypochlorite which is corrosive, and is meant largely to clean hard surfaces commonly used as a bleaching agent, disinfectant and also to sanitize Drainages and pools. If this gets inside the body, it can cause serious harm to the lungs and eyes. Covid-19 which also affects the lungs would definitely make these poor migrant workers vulnerable if they are infected. Research shows that Even a 0.05% solution could hazardous for the eyes and lungs but, 1% of the same were sprayed on them and were asked to close their eyes and cover their faces, it can be noticed in the videos that infants and children who were aged between 3-13 were also handled in the same manner.

Now the question is would people who get off an international flight be forced to hold their ears, squat, frog-leap, or crawl as a penalty, this shows the violation of the principle of equality and Would they be sprayed with chemical disinfectant which could harm their life and violate article 21, and another aspect which triggered the exodus of migrant workers is a failure to carry a proper lockdown and political fight amid the crisis between the centre and Delhi government which led to this welcome bath program and various other problems.

EVENTS WHICH LED TO CONTROVERSY.

While Uttar Pradesh blames Delhi govt for the influx of migrant workers [1] on the other hand Delhi government blames the central government for not implementing the lockdown properly and not taking necessary steps in the crisis for these migrant workers. On the other hand The Central government suspended two senior Delhi government officers and issued show-cause notices to two others for dereliction of duty during the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak. The officers prima facie failed to implement the lockdown orders issued by Centre^[2]

While the Uttar Pradesh government is the host state for these migrant workers, appropriate care has to be taken in order to avoid any chance of community transfer of the Covid-19 as there are thousands of migrant workers from Delhi, its practically not possible for a country like India to keep under their radar and monitor continuously these workers, but ultimately both the governments had to ceasefire their political issues and UP government had to allow these migrant workers.

This similar kind of situation arose in between many states like Telangana and Andhra Pradesh where thousand tried to cross the border to reach their home towns[3] this shows clear failure in communication between states and lack of proper mechanism to implement and adopt the guidelines issued by Central government. But what happened in various states is different from the present situation.

Those who crossed the border amid the lockdown were given an option either to quarantine themselves with the government or return back to their respective states[4]. This is a reasonable condition that a responsible government can put before their citizens rather than spraying chemicals and asking them to take bath in public, while in Kerala, Fire Force team sprayed disinfectant on a group of men. The incident took place at the Kerala-Karnataka’s border’s Muthanga check-post, but they were spraying soap and water combination[5].

CONSTITUTIONAL VIEW POINT

This event is a clear cut showcase of how disparities in the society can change the treatment by the State in the Socialistic, Democratic India. While the claim here can look simple, which is a violation of Article 14, 21, and some principles of the Directive principles but one has to understand that how deep-rooted problems this event can depict, which are the wide gross inequality, Class discrimination and State socialism.

SOCIALISM AND EQUALITY

The word “Socialist” was initially not present in the Preamble. It was added in 1976 to the Preamble by the 42nd Amendment. Then, the concept of “Socialism” has been made explicit. and India’s commitment to the concept of socialism further strengthened and evolved in the course of time in consonance with the Indian values and Ideas.

Social justice and equality are complimentary to each other. Complete justice –social, economical and political-is what Indian Constitution promises to each and every citizen. Such a promise, even in its weakest form and content, cannot condone policies that turn a blind eye to deliberate infliction of misery on large segments of our population.

one facet of ‘equality before law’ is that there shall be no privileged person or class and that none shall be above law and The State Socialism does not want to abolish the state but stands for removing the evils of capitalist discrimination and inequality. State Socialism stands for the idea of a welfare state. The State Socialists believe in, the State alone can remove exploitation, and promotes welfare.

The democratic socialism implies it fully supports to the individual rights, Due process of law, Democratic faith but not by violent means, State is the indispensible instrument to achieve and maintain socialist objectives, Not a heavy class struggle as communism, To establish equality, liberty and justice.

The Supreme Court in plethora of cases now and then referres to the concept of socialism and has used this concept along with the Directive Principles of State Policy to assess and evaluate economic legislation.

In Samatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh[6], the Supreme Court has stated while defining socialism: “Establishment of the egalitarian social order through rule of law is the basic structure of the Constitution.”

In Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India[7], the Supreme Court considered the meaning of “Socialism” as to crystallize a socialistic state securing to its people socio-economic justice by the interplay of the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles

The Preamble to the Constitution read with Directive Principles in Article.38, 42.43,46, and 48A promote the concept of social justice. The aim of social justice is to attain a substantial degree of social, economic, and political equality. Social justice is a tool to mitigate the suffering of the poor, weak, Tribal, and the deprived sections of the society and to elevate them so that they can live with dignity. In the course of time, the courts have raised social and economic justice to the high level of Fundamental Right[8]

EQUALITY, LIFE, LIBERTY AND DIGNITY

Under Article 21 every person has a right to his life which embraces “not only physical existence of life but the equality of life” Article 21 of the Indian constitution deals with these three, these are fundamental to human existence.

The Supreme court of India in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India[9], gave a new dimension to Article 21 and held that the right to live is not merely a physical right but includes within its ambit the right to live with human dignity. In Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi[10]  elaborated this same principle.

Equals to be treated equally, this principle is known to everyone, but the authorities who initiated this disinfectant bath might have thought these migrant workers are not in their class, while literate authorities lost their sense that these sprays can’t be used on humans on the other hand illiterate workers did not have the liberty to question regarding what is being sprayed upon them and not allowed to change their cloths and lost their dignity which most of them would ever recognise.

RIGHT TO HEALTH

Right to health is one of the facets of Article 21 of the constitution, Right to health is an issue of fundamental importance in the Indian society. The responsibility to protect, respect and fulfil the right to health lies not only with the medical profession but also with public functionaries such as administrators ie, executive .

Initially the Supreme Court of India enforced right to health among the people through various public interest litigations which came before the Indian judiciary. With the passage of time the judiciary found that right to life under article 21 is incomplete without right to live with human dignity which includes various other rights like the right to education, the right to livelihood, the right to health and housing etc. thus right to health became a part of fundamental rights and was incorporated under article 21 of the Indian constitution .

In Consumer Education and Research Centre v. Union of India [11], that the Supreme Court for the first time explicitly held that ‘the right to health is an integral facet of a meaningful right to life’ .

In the Instant case executive or the administrators who in fact should act as a tool to safeguard the health of the citizens when they were asked to disinfect the bus, violated the rights of migrant workers by mindlessly spraying disinfectant chemicals on them, who includes women and children below the age of 14  and exposing them to a potential threat to their lives.

CONCLUSION: Even though a crisis like this is very new to Indians and governments to handle. Government of India and States played their part very well in controlling the pandemic in this densely populated country but, there are few incidents which showcase the reality of India and these migrant workers and their stories helped the modern India which once wanted to be a superpower by 2020 to see the reality and understand the problems which poor face, the discrimination which upper-class wont but a poor can see daily in his/her mirror. Even though action has been taken on those who did this out of the count insensitive act, yet the reality of India can never be ignored and this incident should spark the minds of the readers to constantly push India towards the socialism which Mahatma preached and equality which Ambedkar strived in his entire life.

AUTHOR: K.S SAI PAVAN, 3rd Year BA.LLB.(5YDC) student at OSMANIA University, FOUNDER AT THE LAW REPORTER.

---

[1]http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/74869112.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst.

[2] https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/delhi/2020/mar/29/centre-suspends-two-delhi-government-officers-showcauses-two-others-over-lapses-during-lockdown-2123153.html

[3] https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/andhra-pradesh/2020/mar/27/tension-prevails-as-people-try-to-cross-andhra-telangana-borders-defying-coronavirus-lockdown–2122160.html

[4] https://telanganatoday.com/andhra-pradesh-takes-in-those-okay-with-quarantine

[5] https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/coronavirus-india-lockdown-disinfectant-sprayed-on-migrants-on-return-to-up-shows-shocking-video-2202916

[6] [1988] 3 SCC 433.

[7] ‎AIR 1980 SC 1789.

[8] Jain M. P., Indian Constitutional Law, 7th edition, 2016, page 1407.

[9] 1978 AIR 597, 1978 SCR (2) 621.

[10] 1981 AIR 746, 1981 SCR (2) 516.

[11] 1995 AIR 922.