Allahabad HC Terms Yogi's Hoarding Move as 'Unjust'

After Yogi government put up hoardings with names, photographs and addresses of anti-CAA protestors in Lucknow, the Allahabad High Court taking suo-moto cognizance ordered Lucknow District Magistrate and Commissioner of Police to remove them as it violates right of privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Crux of the Matter

The court said that privacy is an intrinsic component of Part III of the Constitution of India which gives all citizens the fundamental right of equality, freedom of speech and expression, freedom of movement and protection of life and personal liberty.

The bench headed by the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court Govind Mathur said, “These fundamental rights cannot be given or taken away by law and laws. All the executive actions must abide by them.”

Advocate General Raghvendra Pratap Singh who appeared on behalf of the state government said, “the court should not interfere in such matters by taking suo-moto cognizance of the government action which was taken against those persons who damaged public and private property.”

The Allahabad Court in its order observed that ‘the object as disclosed to us is only to deter the people from participating in illegal activities.’ Experts suggest that the placement of personal data of selected persons reflects the colourable exercise of powers by the Executive.

The wrong-doer must be brought to book. But can the state go beyond that?

– Justice UU Lalit

The Bench also said: “Where there is gross negligence on part of public authorities and government and the public is put to suffering and where the precious values of the constitution are subjected to injuries, a constitutional court can very well take notice of that at its own. The court in such matters is not required to wait necessarily for a person to come before it to ring the bell of justice.”

The officers will submit a compliance report by March 16 when the court will hear this case again.


Suo moto is a Latin term meaning “on its own motion”. It is used in situations where a government or court official acts of its own initiative. The term is usually applied to actions by a judge taken without a prior motion or request from the parties. Cases may be filed in the public interest when victims lack the capability to commence litigation or their freedom to petition the court has encroached. It aims to ensure the right to equality, life and personality which is guaranteed under part III of the Constitution of India. It also functions as an effective instrument for changes in society or social welfare. More Info