TEAM CODE- AMCC 10

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF DINDA

AT NEW DELHI

Centre for Health and Hygiene

Petitioner

Versus

(i) Federal Government of Dinda

(ii) Times of Dinda

Respondents

Under Article 32, the Constitution of Dinda

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS

 TABLE OF CONTENTS
S.No. Particulars Page No.
1. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 1
2. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 2
3. STATEMENT OF FACTS 3-6
4. STATEMENT OF ISSUES 7
5. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS 8
6. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED 9-18
7. PRAYER 19
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
S.No. Case Title Citation
1. Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd. v. CTO (2005) 1 SCC 625
2. State of Punjab v. M.S. Chawla (1997) 2 SCC 83
3. Madras v. V.G. Rows AIR 1952 SC 196

1
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The respondent submits to the jurisdiction the Honourable Supreme Court of Dinda under
Article 32, the Constitution of Dinda.

2
 STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a contagious disease caused by severe acute
respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The first known case was identified in
the city of Chugian in December 2019. The disease has since spread worldwide, leading to an
ongoing pandemic.

2. By mid-January 2020, nations across the globe had started reporting similar cases.
Chugian, a city in Chang, failed to share any details of the virus with the outside world and
asserted that there was no evidence of its human-to-human transmission. As a precautionary
measure, the other countries started screening passengers travelling from Chang. In the
Capital of Chang, local authorities started reporting few cases and its neighbouring countries
started reporting cases of COVID-19 after which they were forced to go under a lockdown.

3. On 11th March 2020, WHO declared it to be a pandemic. About 1.5 million people were
infected and 85,000 lost their lives to the pandemic, by the 1st week of April 2020. With no
vaccine in place, the world economy had crippled due to the lockdown that had to be imposed
across countries.

4. Dinda is one of the developing nations with a dense population in South Asia with a
substantial amount of health infrastructure but with a huge socio-economic and gender gap
ratio disparity.

5. Chang and Dinda are neighbouring countries with a history of border tensions. However,
considering the size of their markets, both engage in regular trade. The first case of
COVID19 in Dinda was reported on 30 January 2020 and by the first week of April 2020,
there were about 5500 infections and over 150 deaths.

6. On 22nd March 2020, The PM of Dinda Mr Bajendra Sodhi initiated Janta Curfew for 14
hours (7 am to 9 pm) where people were restricted from stepping out of homes and just the
essential services like medical, daily supplies were exempted. As the cases increased and
Covid 19 became more contagious, the Prime minister announced a nationwide lockdown on
24th March 2020 as a preventive measure. It immediately affected all sectors of the economy
and specifically the migrant labourers, unorganised sectors, domestic workers, and the
marginalized sections of the society. Millions of migrant workers were affected by the
closure of industries and workplaces, which resulted in the loss of income, food shortages,
and uncertainty about their future. Many of them, as well as their families, starved to death.

3
While the government assured that the affected would receive food packages, the distribution
mechanism was ineffective.

7. Thousands of migrant workers were seen walking or bicycling hundreds of kilometres to

return to their native places due to the lack of work and money. Many people were arrested
for breaking the lockdown, and some died from exhaustion or traffic accidents.

8. The Monitor Society an independent minority religious institution conducted an event of

almost 2000 people within their premises on the 13th of March 2020 at a time when the
government of Dinda had started cancelling all activities of mass gatherings. It was later
discovered that more than half of those who were present at the event had been tested positive
and had to be put into quarantine.

9. The Ministry of Health in Dinda commented in its official statement that those who
attended the event had become one of the biggest causes for the spread of Covid-19 in the
country as most of them were found positive. They had travelled to different parts of the
country even before the lockdown was declared. Many Media reports claimed that the
gathering included citizens from countries that had already turned positive in the outbreak of
the virus in February 2020. It was reported across national media that Monitor Society
members were spreading the virus in the country as there were instances of them defying the
lockdown and also nondeclaration of travel history.

10. An FIR is filed against Ross, the head of Monitor society, and 7 others leaders under The
Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, Section 3 and Dinda Penal Code, 1860, Ss. 269, 270, 271 and
120B. Also, relevant provisions of the National Security Act, 1980 were invoked against the
members as it was alleged that they were non-co-operative with the State departments and
health officials.

11. Resultantly, they created terror by contributing to the spread of disease to remote areas of
the State and thus infecting more people. Times of Dinda, one of the most circulated
newspapers of the country claimed in its report that it had traced links of the Monitor Society
with terror activities in the past and flouting the visa guidelines. Members of the Monitor
society filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court and submitted that even though similar
violations were reported from other parts of the country by members of other social, political,
and religious groups, NSA was not invoked in those cases and that this is discrimination.

4
12. While this was still under consideration, the second wave of the pandemic hit the country
while the Government of Dinda was projecting that it has tackled the first wave of the
pandemic successfully and is creating robust infrastructure to tackle the second wave of the
pandemic.

13. The Federal Government of Dinda issued directions to the State governments to create a
comprehensive plan concerning bumping bed capacity, ICU wards, creating additional
hospitals, makeshift hospitals, and oxygen supplies.

14. Also, suitable initiatives for achieving and maintaining an adequate level of testing,
surveillance, and risk communication for promoting the wearing of masks, physical
distancing, and hand hygiene. However, the pandemic crumbled the existing healthcare
system and exposed the reality. There was a lack of beds in the hospitals, no adequate
infrastructure for hospitals, patients and doctors, lack of national hospital admission policy,
scarcity of oxygen in hospital leading to thousands of deaths, unavailability of vaccines, the
production capacity of vaccines, vaccine pricing and supply of essentials drugs were all in
question. There was rampant hoarding of essential medicines, black marketing of essential
drugs and supplies further degraded the scenario.

15. Centre for Health and Hygiene (CHH), a non-governmental organization conducted a
study on violation of health and labour rights during the pandemic and found that the reason
for the failure of Dinda’s healthcare infrastructure in handling the second wave of the
pandemic is the absence of statutory framework on healthcare and recognition of the right to
health as a fundamental right and violation of rights of migrant workers in the absence on any
organized body regulating their issues and adjudicating their rights.

16. Based on its study, CHH raised concerns about the violation of human and labour rights
during the lockdown and pandemic, it filed a Public Interest Litigation before the Supreme
Court to act for such strict measures adopted by the government challenging the
constitutional validity of the Order and the subsequent actions by the government which
imposed the nationwide lockdown and denied better access to healthcare and medication inter
alia on the following grounds:

a. That the lockdown order violates the Fundamental Rights of the citizens as it curtailed
their constitutionally guaranteed rights.

5
b. That the denial of access to health care is a violation of the right to health which is
fundamental to any human being.

c. That the Monitor Society members have been targeted for the spread of the Covid 19 Virus
and there is malice in the State’s actions.

d. That the blatant use of force by authorities is a violation of the rule of law, is arbitrary and
lacks application of mind.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to entertain the matter and the same is listed for
hearing.

6
 STATEMENT OF ISSUES
1. Whether the lockdown order violates the Fundamental Rights of the citizens as it curtailed
their constitutionally guaranteed rights.

2. Whether the denial of access to health care is a violation of the right to health which is
fundamental to any human being.

3. Whether the Monitor Society members have been targeted for the spread of the Covid 19
Virus and there is malice in the State’s actions.

4. Whether the blatant use of force by authorities is a violation of the rule of law, is arbitrary
and lacks application of mind.

7
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
1. The lockdown order does not violate the Fundamental rights of citizens

1.1 Lockdown: The need of the Hour and justified as Pandemic declared by World Health
Organisation
1.2 Lockdown order based on evidence
1.3 Lockdown Guidelines- Comprehensive in nature
2. Government of Dinda ensured access to health care
2.1 The Government of Dinda not prepared at the announcement of Lockdown to deal
efficiently with rising number of cases
2.2 The measures taken by Government of Dinda in accordance with its economic
capacity
2.3 Efforts by the Government of Dinda to create and implement a Comprehensive Plan

3. The members of Monitor Society are responsible for spread of Covid-19

3.1 Violation by the members of Monitor Society to comply with the directions of Federal
Government of Dinda and WHO
3.2 Non-cooperation by members of Monitor Society with State Governments and Health
Officials
3.3 No bias and malice against the members of Monitor Society on any grounds
4. The use of force by authorities in accordance with rule of law
4.1 No blatant use of force by the Government
4.2 Actions of the Government/Police proportionate with the need to safeguard the right
to health of citizens

8
 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

1. The lockdown order does not violate the Fundamental rights of citizens

The Federal government of Dinda can constitutionally infringe on all kinds of individual
rights as sometimes protecting the greater public good requires it. Deeply concerned both
by the alarming levels of spread and severity, and by the alarming levels of inaction,
WHO made the assessment that COVID-19 could be characterized as a pandemic on 11
March,2020.1

The facets of the right to health as embodied in Article 21 of the Constitution of Dinda.
However, just like the fundamental rights conferred under Article 19, this fundamental
right under Article 21 of the Constitution is also not an absolute right and is subject to
reasonable restrictions. It is always desirable to have a uniform central policy like ICMR
policy, especially during pandemic situation like the present one, to be followed
consistently by all the States in the country.

1.1 Lockdown: The need of the Hour and justified as Pandemic declared by World
Health Organisation
The lockdown placed “life” over “livelihoods,” and health over economic well-being.
Initial national lockdown should thus be seen as buying time to create a massive testing
infrastructure, so that even asymptomatic people could be tested and quarantined. That’s
the only way to manage the coronavirus pandemic until we get drugs and vaccines to
administer en masse.
The Covid-19 outbreak is bound to be classified as a disaster under the DMA, 2005,
allowing the federal government wide powers to deal with the pandemic by laying down
policies, plans and guidelines for disaster management to ensure a timely and effective
response to the disaster. Section 38 of the DMA casts a duty on the states to follow the
directions of NDMA. Moreover, Section 72 of the DMA.
COVID-19 is more infectious than other coronaviruses such as SARS or MERS-CoV.2
In the absence of treatment or a vaccine, ceasing most human contact is really the only
way to stop the spread of the virus. Essentially, the less contact people have with each

1
“WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19”, 11 March 2020, available at
https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-
briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020
2
“Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: implications for infection prevention precautions”, 9 July, 2020, available at
https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/transmission-of-sars-cov-2-implications-for-infection-
prevention-precautions.

9
 other, the less the virus can spread. Given the rapid spread of the virus, social lockdown
was urgent to bring overall transmission down. It was an attempt to ‘flatten the curve’ or
reduce infections and spread cases out over a longer time frame to avoid overwhelming
health systems.
Since the population in Dinda was totally unprepared for a pandemic and was likely to be
non- compliant with less stringent measures, imposition of lockdown was the best measure
resorted to by the Government of Dinda.

In the case of the State of Punjab v. M.S. Chawla3, the Supreme Court had interpreted
Article 21 of the Constitution of India in a broader sense where it is said that the Centre has
the constitutional obligation for providing certain health facilities to the common people. The
Centre has a full obligation to follow certain measures and declare a public health emergency
under this Article. Though no emergency has been declared under this article, the government
has the authority to do so and we can also be deprived of personal liberty without the
declaration of an emergency. This provision is applicable in the current situation where the
coronavirus pandemic has been resulting in the death of people in India.

This lockdown primarily affects the fundamental rights laid down in:

• Article 19(1)(d) which protects the right of free movement within the territory of
India.
• Article 19(1)(g) that secures the right to carry out any occupation, trade or business
and to practice any profession in this country.

The concept of reasonable restriction is mentioned in Article 19(5) and Article 19(6) of
the Constitution of Dinda which makes it clear that such restrictions can be imposed on the
rights provided in the given Articles of the fundamental rights in the interest of the general
public. The guidelines issued for the lockdown order under the Disaster Management Act,
2005 totally qualifies as a reasonable restriction under two Articles of the Constitution of
India namely, Article 19(5) and Article 19(6). In the case of Madras v. V.G. Rows4, the test
of reasonability regarding a restriction was laid down. It stated that for deciding the
reasonableness of a restriction, some factors have to be considered. Such factors include – the

3
(1997) 2 SCC 83.
4
AIR 1952 SC 196.

10
underlying purpose of the restriction, disproportion of the restriction, the extent and urgency
of such restriction and the prevailing conditions at that time.

The Supreme Court, in the case of Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd. v. CTO5, had further
observed that a reasonable restriction which is imposed in the State cannot be called
unreasonable just because it uses harsh measures for its application.
1.2 Lockdown order based on scientific evidence

The response of Dinda government drew on epidemiological and economic research,

especially those pertaining to the Spanish Flu, that highlighted that an early, intense
lockdown provided a win-win strategy to save lives and preserve livelihoods via economic
recovery in the medium to long-term.

Highlighting the benefits of the lockdown, an expert from Indian Council of Medical
Research (ICMR) added- “It is believed that one COVID-19 infected person can spread the
virus to more than 400 people in about 30 days. Now, think of the time, when all the 12,000
COVID-19 infected patients (as of today) were not quarantined and were out roaming in the
open in the country. The virus would have spread like a wildfire. And that is when lockdown,
social distancing measures come in the picture. With these proper guidelines in place, we can
break the chain of the infection.”6
The government faced an extraordinary challenge to protect over a billion densely packed
people, but ramped-up efforts to prevent the spread of the coronavirus in India need to
include rights protections.
1.3 Lockdown Guidelines- Comprehensive in nature

The Government of Dinda on 24 March, 2020 issued guidelines for lockdown in the country.
Guideline 9 provided that - " No religious congregation shall be permitted." “Prime Minister
exhorted the citizens to follow seven steps in their fight against the pandemic. First, to take
special care of the elderly, especially those who have chronic disease. Second to completely
adhere to the ‘Lakshman Rekha’ of Lockdown and Social Distancing; use homemade face-
covers and masks without fail. Third to follow the instructions issued by AYUSH ministry to
enhance immunity. Fourth to download the Arogya Setu Mobile App to help prevent the

5
(2005) 1 SCC 625.
6
“Community transmission of Covid-19 is inevitable: ICMR”, 14 March, 2020 available at
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/healthcare/biotech/healthcare/community-transmission-of-covid-
19-is-inevitable-icmr/articleshow/74621197.cms?from=mdr.

11
spread of corona infection. Inspire others to download the app as well. Fifth to take care of
poor families; to fulfil their food requirements. Sixth to be compassionate towards the people
who work in every individual business or industry. Do not deprive them of their livelihood.
Seventh to pay utmost respect to our nation’s Corona Warriors – our doctors and nurses,
sanitation workers and police force7.” Over the two years, a number of detailed guidelines
have been issued and updated by the Government of Dinda in accordance with the needs of
society.8

2. Federal Government of Dinda ensured access to health care

The pandemic is still not over in the country as also the world and it is extremely difficult to
predict with accuracy, it’s further trajectory, mutations and waves. It requires rapidly scaled-
up health and non-health efforts for a long period of time which will cost the nation lakhs of
crores. There is a need to focus simultaneously on prevention, preparedness, mitigation, and
recovery, which calls for a different order of mobilization of both financial and technical
resources. There are many challenges that the economy of Dinda facing with regard to the
financial market, simultaneously with the pandemic. The Federal government has adopted a
multi-pronged, multi-sectoral, whole of society and a whole of government approach, along
with the National Plan, to tailor the response of the nation in tune with the evolving nature of
the virus.

The Government of Dinda issued circulars, guidelines and advisories to ensure the right to
health. Government adopted a pre-emptive, pro-active, graded, built around a comprehensive
strategy to prevent infections, save lives and minimize impact. Government of Dinda, based
on its experience of successfully managing pandemics and epidemics in the past, provided the
requisite strategy, plans and procedures to the State Governments and UT administrations.
This included containment plans and guidelines on a wide range of subjects related to travel,
behavioural & psycho-social health, surveillance, laboratory support, hospital infrastructure,
clinical management, rational use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) etc., including
inspirational guidance for healthcare personnel.

Ministry of Health & Family Welfare released containment plans to contain cluster and large
outbreaks on 2nd March and 4th April, 2020 respectively and these plans were updated from

7
Available at: https://www.mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/Guidelines_0.pdf
8
For details, see https://www.mha.gov.in/notifications/circulars-covid-19.

12
time to time. The containment plans envisage a strategy of breaking the chain of transmission
by : (i) defining containment and buffer zones,

(ii) applying strict perimeter control,

(iii) intensive active house to house search for cases and contacts,

(iv) isolation and testing of suspect cases and high-risk contacts,

(v) quarantine of high-risk contacts,

(vi) intensive risk communication to raise community awareness on simple preventive

measures and need for prompt treatment seeking and

(vii) strengthening of passive Influenza Like Illness (ILI)/ Severe Acute Respiratory
Illness (SARI) surveillance in containment and buffer zones.

A three-tier arrangement of health facilities was created for appropriate management of

COVID-19 cases, (i) COVID Care Center with isolation beds for mild or pre-
symptomatic cases; (ii) Dedicated COVID Health Centre (DCHC) with oxygen supported
isolation beds for moderate cases and (iii) Dedicated COVID Hospital (DCH) with ICU
beds for severe cases] has been implemented. Tertiary care hospitals under ESIC,
Defence, Railways, paramilitary forces, Steel Ministry etc. have been leveraged for case
management.

Guidelines on Clinical management of COVID-19 were issued and regularly updated and
widely circulated. These included case definition, prevention of infection control, laboratory
diagnosis, early supporting therapy, management of severe cases and complications.

To ensure accessibility of quality treatment for both COVID and non-COVID health issues,
to far flung areas, use of telemedicine has been promoted in a big way. 'eSanjeevani', a web-
based comprehensive telemedicine solution is being utilized (in 23states) to extend the reach
of specialized healthcare services to masses in both rural areas and isolated communities.9

2.1 The Government of Dinda faced with uncertain and unforeseen Pandemic situation

Since the lockdown was imposed to stop further spread of the virus, the Federal Government
of Dinda was not well-equipped to deal with the rising number of cases. The inability was
on account of first ever pandemic of such a large scale.

9
Available at: https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1684546

13
 The Federal Government of Dinda was faced with sudden pressure to improve and built its
health infrastructure. During the first wave of the pandemic, the government was just
preparing itself. Whatever the efforts and measures it adopted were as per the situation and
the means available to it.

2.2 Appropriate measures of Government of Dinda

The Federal Government of Dinda issued directions to the State governments to create a
comprehensive plan concerning bumping bed capacity, ICU wards, creating additional
hospitals, makeshift hospitals, and oxygen supplies. MHA requested States/UTs to implement
Lockdown Measures in Letter and Spirit to fight COVID-19 on 1 April, 2020.10 Federal
Government of Dinda has been responsive and has taken various steps in quick succession to
mitigate the difficulties faced by the citizens having regard to the ground realities, the
availability of drugs and medical equipment, domestically and their anticipated demand as
well as the need to import such material to bridge the gap.

The pandemic is still not over in the country as also the world and it is extremely difficult to
predict with accuracy, it’s further trajectory, mutations and waves. It requires rapidly scaled-
up health and non-health efforts for a long period of time which will cost the nation lakhs of
crores. There is a need to focus simultaneously on prevention, preparedness, mitigation, and
recovery, which calls for a different order of mobilization of both financial and technical
resources.

3. The members of Monitor Society are responsible for spread of Covid-19

In the present case, the members of Monitor Society in spite of flouting the legal provisions
are alleging the violation of their rights. Monitor Society was never wrongfully targeted. The
allegations were based on facts and evidences as well as unlawful behaviour of the members
of the Monitor Society as follows:
3.1 Violation by the members of Monitor Society to comply with the directions of
Federal Government of Dinda and WHO
The members of Monitor Society had travelled to different parts of the country even before
the lockdown was declared. Many Media reports claimed that the gathering included citizens
from countries that had already turned positive in the outbreak of the virus in February 2020.
(a) Guidelines of World Health Organisation and Covid-19 Protocol

10
Available at :
https://www.mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/PR_MHArequestsStatesUTstoimplementLockdown_01042020%20_
0.pdf.

14
The Union home secretary forwarded the lockdown guidelines to the states and Union
Territories by an order of the same date. The measures include the shutting of all non-
essential government establishments, all commercial and private establishments, industries,
transport by air, rail and road, hospitality services, educational institutions, places of worship,
political gatherings, etc. Certain exceptions for medical staff, journalists, petrol pumps,
essential stores, etc have been provided for. The district collectors are to be the “incident
commanders” in each district who would also decide on who should be issued exception
passes. Downstream, in several states, the competent authorities have issued orders under
Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, “prohibiting more than five people
from assembling in public places”. Similar directions were issued by World Health
Organisation.
(b) Violation of Laws of Dinda
The legal provisions which have been violated are - The Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897,
Section 3; Dinda Penal Code, 1860, Ss. 269, 270, 271 and 120B and National Security Act,
1980.
3.2 Non-cooperation by members of Monitor Society with State Governments and
Health Officials
People should understand their duty and follow rules very strictly. It is the duty of every
citizen to perform their fundamental duties as guaranteed under the Constitution of Dinda. By
not following the Guidelines/SOPs issued by the State from time to time, such as, not
wearing the masks, not keeping social distances, to participate in the gatherings and the
celebrations without maintaining social distances, they are ultimately not damaging
themselves but they cause damage to the others also. They cannot be permitted to play with
the lives of the others and they cannot be permitted to infringe the rights of other citizens, like
right to health guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of Dinda.
Defying lockdown order and non-declaration of travel history by the members of Monitor
Society are gross offences done by them. Further, the Head of the Monitor Society
intentionally failed to disclose and cooperate with the Government authorities.
3.3 No bias and malice against the members of Monitor Society on any grounds
The Times of Dinda proceeded on the national security and published the news so as to
prevent any harm to the country and the people, collected the evidences from confidential
sources and thereafter published. It collected the evidences from confidential sources and
thereafter published. Recently, the Prime Minister of India expressed his sadness by saying -
of late, some people have started interpreting human rights from their own angle as per their
15
selfish interests. Tendency to see infringement in one situation and not in a similar situation
has damaged human rights to a great extent... the biggest infringement of human rights takes
place when they are seen from the prism of politics and political profit and loss. This
selective behaviour is harmful to our democracy. With their selective approach, there are
some people who harm the country's image in the name of human rights protection. We need
to be cautious of them. A similar trend can be noticed in Dinda in the present case where the
members of Monitor Society in spite of flouting the legal provisions are alleging the violation
of their rights.
4. The use of force by authorities in accordance with Rule of law
The police authorities came forward in the pandemic times, putting their lives in danger for
the sake of public safety and country's welfare. Allegations against them hold untrue and
unreasonable.
State governments in Dinda have constitutional authority over police agencies, the nature of
police-led initiatives is likely to vary across States.
When the very right to life of the nation is imperilled, such constitutional arguments are
heresy. After all, the Doctrine of Necessity proclaims loud and clear that “Necessity knows
no law”. For whatever it is worth, if we are willing to accept that these unforeseen times are
compelling us to act beyond the four corners of our basic law. Much of this policing has been
carried out respectfully and professionally. To those officers and soldiers working in this
way, the country owes a huge debt. Their job is unprecedently challenging and dangerous,
and one for which they had almost no time to prepare.
4.1 No blatant use of force by the Government
The police authorities came forward in the pandemic times, putting their lives in danger for
the sake of public safety and country's welfare. Allegations against them hold untrue and
unreasonable.
The goal of police was to ensure the lockdown doesn’t inconvenience too many people.
physical force was used only to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to
restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be
insufficient to achieve police objectives.
This is in accordance with Principle 6 of Peelian Principles of Policing, 1829 11 - “To use
physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be

11
Available at: http://police.uw.edu/faqs/the-peelian-principles/. The Peelian Principles summarize the ideas that
Sir Robert Peel developed to define an ethical police force. The approach expressed in these principles is
commonly known as policing by consent. In this model of policing, police officers are regarded as citizens in

16
insufficient to obtain public cooperation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or
to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on
any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.”
To avert the ongoing breakdown of the rule of law in India, the police acted in this
manner. The authorities stuck to democratic policing for the country. For the police, the
lockdown creates tinderbox conditions. Frontline officers expect some violations of
lockdown rules, but their aim is to prevent even worse outcomes, such as large-scale violence
and breakdowns of public order. Despite these handicaps, Dinda police agencies have risen to
the challenge of enforcing the lockdown and promoting public health.
After the lockdown order, police agencies aggressively enforced social distancing through
patrolling vans, foot patrols, and vehicular checkpoints. These techniques follow a
conventional “law and order” paradigm, which is engrained into the training and
organisational culture of the police. In practical terms, lockdown enforcement means crowd
control, which entails swift and aggressive action to seize control of public spaces.
Much of this policing has been carried out respectfully and professionally. To those officers
and soldiers working in this way, the country owes a huge debt. Their job is unprecedently
challenging and dangerous, and one for which they had almost no time to prepare.
4.2 Actions of the Government and Police proportionate with the need to safeguard the
right to health of citizens
The police authorities were compelled to use force to counter violations of lockdown order by
people for the safety of the health. There must be a strict implementation by the authorities so
as to ensure that the SOPs and the guidelines issued from time to time are strictly adhered to
and followed by the people.
Further, it is important to understand that human rights are not associated with rights only,
but is a subject of our duties too. Underscoring those rights and duties are two tracks on
which the journey of human development and human dignity takes place. Duties are equally
important as rights and should not be discussed separately as they complement each other.
Monitor Society members failed to fulfil their duties and unfortunately just concerned about
their rights.

uniform. They exercise their powers to police their fellow citizens with the implicit consent of those fellow
citizens. “Policing by consent” indicates that the legitimacy of policing in the eyes of the public is based upon a
general consensus of support that follows from transparency about their powers, their integrity in exercising
those powers and their accountability for doing so.

17
 PRAYER

In the light of facts, arguments and authorities cited, the respondent prays the following
reliefs from the Hon’ble Supreme Court –

(a) To dismiss the petition;

(b) To declare that the Lockdown order is constitutionally valid and had not violated the
Fundamental Rights;
(c) To grant costs of litigation against the petitioner
(d) To impose exemplary fine on the petitioner for filing present petition
(e) To grant any other relief which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interests of
justice, equity and good conscience.

18