A bench headed by Justice N.V. Ramana said although cherished in our heart as a "Paradise on Earth", the history of this beautiful land (Jammu and Kashmir) is etched with violence and militancy. "While the mountains of Himalayas spell tranquility, yet blood is shed every day. In this land of inherent contradictions, these petitions add to the list, wherein two sides have shown two different pictures which are diametrically opposite and factually irreconcilable," said the court.
The apex court said it will not delve into the political propriety of the decision (with the imposition of restrictions) taken, which is best left for democratic forces to act on. "Our limited scope is to strike a balance between the liberty and security concerns so that the right to life is secured and enjoyed in the best possible manner," it observed.
The apex court said that liberty and security have always been at loggerheads. "The question before us, simply put, is what do we need more, liberty or security? Although the choice is seemingly challenging, we need to clear ourselves from the platitude of rhetoric and provide a meaningful answer so that every citizen has adequate security and sufficient liberty."
The pendulum of preferences should not swing in either extreme direction so that one preference compromises the other. "It is not our forte to answer whether it is better to be free than secure or be secure rather than free. However, we are here only to ensure that citizens are provided all the rights and liberty to the highest extent in a given situation while ensuring security at the same time," it observed.
ss/vd
( With inputs from IANS )