They are seminal not because they are extraordinary. Like all good criminal law judgments, they have carefully law judgments, they have carefully analysed the facts, dispassionately applied the law, refused to be swayed by vague allegations made by the police and bluntly spoken truth to power. It is the sign of the times we live in that these judgments are seminal simply because the judges did their job. This job was done well particularly on two counts the extraordinary wide definition of the term "Terrorist Act" under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) has been seemingly perceived by policemen across the country as an invitation to pass off ordinary crimes as terror offences. In this case too, the worst the trio could be accused of is being part of a whatsaap group that organised protests against CAA that later turned violent. Perhaps that is why, the police insinuated "a larger conspiracy" with "the potential of tumultuous consequences", and "undermining the security of state" to justify their charge of terrorism. The judges wisely saw beyond such fear mongering, painly stating that their actions could not be considered terrorist acts unless they produced a prolonged psychological effect on society. Being part of a no matter how incendiary its contents, is ordinarily not a crime, let alone instilling large-scale fear in the country ought to read the judgment carefully. Pressing cavalier charges against protesting students only trivialise terrorism. The centre on Wednesday aproved the Deep Ocean Mission to tap vast marine living and non-living resources, develop deep sea technologies for sustainable use of ocean resources, conduct research on climate variables and support the country's Blue Economy initiatives including marine fisheries, off-shore energy and coastal tourism.
