Somnath Suryawanshi was arrested in December 2024 for allegedly participating in protests and riots that erupted in Parbhani district on December 11, following the desecration of a replica of the Indian Constitution. A resident of Pune and a student at a law college in Parbhani, Somnath was taken into custody and, after a brief remand, shifted to judicial custody. He died on December 15, allegedly as a result of injuries sustained from police torture during his time in lock-up.

Mother’s plea ignored for months

His mother, 60-year-old Vijayabai Venkat Suryawanshi, has been waging a determined legal battle since December 18, 2024, when she filed a formal complaint demanding registration of an FIR against the officers responsible for her son’s death. In her statement, Vijayabai recalled receiving a phone call informing her that Somnath had died of a “heart attack.” But what followed only deepened her suspicion.

While she was en-route to Parbhani, officials told her the body had already been shifted to the Aurangabad Government Medical College and Hospital (GMCH). On the way, she was intercepted by the Parbhani police and taken to the SP’s office, where she alleges a senior officer told her: “We didn’t kill your son. He died of a heart attack. We can help you. If you take the body, we’ll offer police training to one of your sons.” 

She refused the offer and proceeded to Aurangabad, where a post-mortem was conducted. Social activists at the hospital informed her that the autopsy indicated multiple injuries consistent with custodial torture — contradicting the state’s version of a natural death due to illness.

Bombay HC recognises prima facie brutality

On July 4, 2025, the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court, acknowledging “prima facie material indicating custodial brutality and violation of constitutional rights”, directed the police to register an FIR within a week. However, the Mahayuti-led Maharashtra government under Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis failed to comply. Instead, the state challenged the order before the Supreme Court. The apex court, however, upheld the High Court’s directive on July 30, observing that the FIR was not optional but necessary for enabling an impartial criminal investigation.

As per the report of The Statesman, the Supreme Court Bench, comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh, clarified that registration of an FIR should not be interpreted as assigning guilt but as initiating a fair investigation under the law.

Presented facts and successfully argued in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India for Vijaybai Vyankat Suryawanshi.

The Supreme Court maintained the order of the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court to file FIR and launch investigation as per the application made by Vijaybai on… pic.twitter.com/m8CdCtfqh2

— Prakash Ambedkar (@Prksh_Ambedkar) July 30, 2025

On July 4, The Aurangabad Bench of the Hon’ble Court of Bombay had ordered to register an FIR against the police responsible for the custodial death of Somnath Suryavanshi and the brutality in Parbhani.

But the State of Maharashtra appealed against the order of High Court in the… pic.twitter.com/DhG6PHRvmU

— Prakash Ambedkar (@Prksh_Ambedkar) July 30, 2025

Detailed report may be read here and here.

Allegations of torture and postmortem findings

In her FIR, Vijayabai has alleged that Somnath was subjected to three days of continuous custodial torture at the New Mondha police station. Activists have also corroborated her account, noting that the post-mortem report documented fractured bones and internal injuries, directly contradicting earlier government statements that claimed he had pre-existing respiratory issues and died of chest pain.

This claim was echoed by Chief Minister Fadnavis in the legislative assembly shortly after the new Mahayuti government was sworn in. He maintained that Somnath had a “serious respiratory illness” and had died of “natural causes.” However, these claims were debunked when the post-mortem revealed evidence of blunt force trauma, broken shoulder bones, and signs of sustained physical assault.

Detailed report may be read here and here.

Prakash Ambedkar’s legal intervention and political fallout

The case received a significant boost when Prakash Ambedkar, chief of the Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi (VBA) and grandson of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, took up the cause and personally argued the matter before the courts. “Somnath shed his blood for the Constitution of this country. He was murdered for standing up for its values,” Ambedkar said in a press briefing after the SC order.

He added that the FIR will pave the way for a broader investigation into custodial violence in Maharashtra. “This case may become a benchmark for custodial death investigations. We are now demanding that the JJ Hospital doctors who issued secondary medical opinions without court orders also be made accused. The role of doctors must not be overlooked in shielding police impunity,” he said.

Ambedkar also questioned the legality of the “combing operation” carried out in Parbhani after the desecration incident, during which multiple Dalit homes were raided, and arrests made without due process. “All officers who were part of that illegal operation must be investigated,” he added.

मुंबई उच्च न्यायालयाच्या औरंगाबाद खंडपीठाने सोमनाथ सूर्यवंशी हत्येप्रकरणी एका आठवड्याच्या आत पोलिसांवर एफआयआर दाखल करण्याचा स्पष्ट आदेश दिला होता. मात्र, आजपर्यंत तो एफआयआर दाखल झालेला नाही. त्यामुळे आता पोलीस आणि प्रशासनवर कोर्टाच्या अवमानाच्या (Contempt of Court) अंतर्गत… pic.twitter.com/uizaD3wmSC

— Prakash Ambedkar (@Prksh_Ambedkar) July 30, 2025

What lies ahead?

With the FIR now registered under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which replaced IPC Section 302 (murder), attention is shifting toward the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or a Judicial Commission. Activists and lawyers have demanded that the probe be conducted independently of the Maharashtra police to avoid conflict of interest, given that police officials are the primary accused.

The delay in FIR registration — despite the HC’s clear order and the absence of any stay by the Supreme Court — has also raised questions about contempt of court and executive resistance to judicial directives, showing that the Parbhani police’s inaction between July 4 and August 1 could expose them to proceedings for wilful non-compliance.

Related:

Bombay High Court orders FIR in Somnath Suryawanshi custodial death case, slams police for delay and bias

Biased and Preconceived: Bombay HC criticises police inquiry into Parbhani custodial death of Somnath Suryawanshi

Magistrate probe indicts Parbhani police in Somnath Suryawanshi custodial death: MSHRC

State-sanctioned brutality? Dalit communities targeted in Parbhani “combing operations”, women, children abused

Judicial Setback: Supreme Court dilutes Bombay HC’s bold stand on police accountability in custodial killing in Badlapur case

The post Custodial Death of Dalit Law Student Somnath Suryawanshi: FIR registered after Supreme Court upholds Bombay HC directive appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Justice Monga allowed the petition and quashed the impugned FIR No. 239/2024 dated July 6, 2024 lodged at Police Station Purani Abadi, district Ganganagar (Rajasthan) registered against the Tajender Pal Singh and emphasized that this provision should not be misused to stifle legitimate dissent. It clarified that only deliberate actions with malicious intent would fall under its scope, specifically those that threaten India’s sovereignty, unity, and integrity.

The Court stressed that Section 152 should be applied cautiously, ensuring it aligns with the right to freedom of speech and expression. It noted that there must be a clear connection between the speech and the likelihood of rebellion for such provisions to apply. The Court further observed that this provision should act as a shield for national security, not as a weapon to suppress dissent.

Background

In the case, the complainant asserted that Tajender Pal Singh, the petitioner, posed a threat to India’s integrity and sovereignty, which led to the filing of a police complaint. This complaint was subsequently converted into an FIR, which the petitioner sought to challenge. Tajender Pal Singh, who identifies himself as a preacher of the Sikh religion, claimed to be officially appointed by the Sikh Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee, Amritsar, as the coordinator for the Dharam Prachaarak Committee in Rajasthan. However, he contended that the complainant was a proxy planted by a rival from another Gurdwara to misuse state machinery and settle personal scores. The petitioner denied the allegations, arguing that they were baseless and part of a vendetta.

The petitioner filed the Criminal Misc. Petition seeking the quashing of FIR No. 0239/2024, registered on July 6, 2024, at the Purani Abadi Police Station, District Ganganagar, for alleged offenses under Sections 152 and 197(1)(c) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The complaint alleged that on July 5, 2024, the petitioner posted an audio-video recording on Facebook from Baba Deep Singh Gurudwara, in which he reportedly expressed sympathy for Amritpal Singh. The complainant accused the petitioner of spreading anti-national content and inciting public unrest.

Decision of the High Court

After hearing arguments from both parties, the Court ruled that Section 152 of the BNS must be applied with caution, in alignment with the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. The Court emphasized that to invoke this provision, a clear and imminent connection must exist between the speech and the likelihood of rebellion.

The Court also dismissed the charges in the FIR under Section 197, BNS, noting that an expression critical of government actions, without inciting violence or hatred, does not fall under the scope of this section. Section 197, BNS, aims to safeguard national integration by criminalizing actions that promote disharmony, enmity, or hatred. However, the Court clarified that merely the potential of causing disharmony is not enough to establish intent, especially in the absence of concrete evidence.

The Court called for proper judicial oversight and clear guidelines to interpret terms like “disharmony” and “ill-will” to prevent this provision from being misused as a tool for suppressing dissent. It stressed the need for enforcement authorities to exercise restraint to ensure constructive dialogues and political dissent are not stifled.

Regarding the video at the centre of the case, the Court acknowledged that the video, made in Punjabi, could potentially be misunderstood due to the directness and expressive nature of the language. However, it concluded that there was no malice on the part of the speaker. The Court observed that colloquial Punjabi, with its vigor and directness, might unintentionally come across as offensive. For a statement to be criminalized, there must be substantial evidence of malicious intent or public harm, not just subjective offense. Merely perceiving a statement as offensive is insufficient without tangible proof of public repercussions or intent to incite unrest or violence.

“Colloquial Punjabi, with its rich and expressive nature, can invariably come across as offensive, even when no malice or intent to offend is present. This characteristic stems from the inherent directness and vigor of the language, which may sometimes be misunderstood. However, for such expressions to be deemed criminal, there must be demonstrable public repercussions or substantive evidence indicating deliberate malicious intent (mens rea) to commit any public unrest or incite violence. Merely perceiving a statement as offensive is insufficient without a broader context or tangible harm to substantiate the claim” the bench observed.

With regards to the retrospective application of the Sanhita, Justice Monga said that, “In my opinion, the substantive penal provisions of the BNS, 2023 [in this case section 152 and sections 197(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023] cannot be retrospectively invoked against the petitioner for the so-called criminal acts done or committed before 01.07.2024, the date of it’s coming into force.”

The judgement of Rajasthan High Court dated 16.12.2024 can be read here

Related:

Landmark ruling: SC orders Sedition law to be kept in abeyance

The case against Sedition

64 percent increase in Sedition cases since 2015

The post Lawful criticism of government policies through lawful means not constitute sedition: Raj HC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

While some cases that elicited huge social media outrage recently have sparked widespread protests while and such incidents where the victims were marginalised groups have skipped the eyes of the media, the deep-rooted issues of gender-based violence and inadequate enforcement of laws have made meaningful change elusive. The recent incident in Badlapur, Thane, Maharashtra, where two young girls were allegedly sexually assaulted in a school, is a tragic reminder of the vulnerabilities that both children and women face in India today.

Two four-year-old girls attending pre-primary classes at a well-known co-ed school in Badlapur were allegedly sexually assaulted by a 23-year-old male cleaner named Akshay Shinde on August 12 and August 13, 2024. The incidents reportedly took place in the girls’ restroom, which lacked supervision by any female staff. Shinde had been hired on a contractual basis starting August 1, 2024.

The situation came to light when one of the girls complained of pain and revealed her ordeal to her parents. The concerned parents then discovered that a second girl had also been subjected to the same alleged abuse. According to a report by India Today, which cited the FIR, the sexual assaults occurred between 9 a.m. and 12 p.m. on August 13. One of the young victims reported pain in her private areas, and when questioned by her parents, she disclosed that the accused had inappropriately touched her while she was in the school restroom. The complaint further mentioned that the girl appeared scared and informed her parents that an older male at the school, whom she referred to as “dada” (Marathi for elder brother), had undressed her and touched her inappropriately.

Alarmed by this, the girl’s parents contacted the family of her friend, who revealed that their daughter was also frightened of going to school. Both girls were subsequently taken to a local doctor, who confirmed that they had been sexually assaulted. Following this, the parents decided to file a sexual assault complaint. The complaint was lodged on the night of August 16, leading to the arrest of the accused.

On the morning of August 20, the victims’ parents organised a silent protest outside the school. The protest saw participants holding banners demanding the death penalty for the accused. The entire town of Badlapur, Maharashtra, effectively came to a standstill as thousands of demonstrators gathered in support, also to express their outrage. Protesters blocked railway tracks at the local station and stormed the school building where the alleged abuse had taken place. (Details of the protest can be read here.)

According to PTI reports, accused Akshay Shinde, a sweeper employed by the school through a cleaning company on a contract basis beginning August 1, has had his police custody extended until August 26. In a recent development, the suspect was brought before a magistrate in Kalyan this morning under tight police security, as reported by PTI.

A recent report in the Print also suggests that the sexual assault might have taken place earlier that the indicated August 12/13, and that there may be other girls from the school who also have been sexually assaulted.

Delay on filing FIR, taking action by Maharashtra police:

The family reported the incident to the police on August 16, but they allege that the First Information Report (FIR) was not filed by the Maharashtra police until 12 hours later, around 9 p.m. that day, according to a report by India Today. The FIR details that the accused, Akshay Shinde, had sexually abused the child. Shinde was arrested by the police on August 17. According to the report of ThePrint after accessing the FIR, the accused was booked under Sections 65(2) (punishment for raping a woman under 12 years of age), 74 (assault or criminal force against a woman with the intent to outrage her modesty), 75 (sexual harassment) and 76 (assault or criminal force with the intent to disrobe) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 4(2), 8 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The delay in filing the FIR has sparked public anger, as timely circumstantial and medical evidence is critical in such cases. This lack of timely police action has drawn sharp criticism from the opposition, with the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) coalition—comprising the Congress, NCP (Sharad Pawar faction), and Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray faction)—lambasting the Mahayuti-led ruling government for the police’s insensitivity. The opposition alleges that the girls’ parents were forced to wait for 12 hours at the Badlapur police station before their complaints were taken seriously.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has demanded a report from Maharashtra regarding the “12-hour delay” in registering the FIR after the parents lodged a complaint. The Maharashtra State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR) also criticized the school, accusing it of attempting to cover up the crime instead of assisting the parents in filing a police complaint, as reported by PTI.

Susieben Shah, Chairperson of the Maharashtra State Commission for Protection of Child Rights, stated that the school where the two young girls were allegedly sexually abused chose to conceal the crime rather than help the parents file a police complaint. She mentioned that the child protection unit eventually escorted the parents to the police station to lodge the complaint. When Shah inquired about the case with the school management, they attempted to downplay the incident. She questioned why the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act should not be applied to the school management. As per the report of thePrint, The parents further highlighted that when the family approached the school for CCTV footage, the family said the authorities denied them access and said the CCTV system had been turned off for the past 15 days.

As per a report in India Today, Shah further noted that if the school had promptly alerted the police, the subsequent chaos in Badlapur could have been avoided, emphasizing that the issue stemmed from the parents being made to wait for 11 hours. Additionally, the medical examination of one of the girls was delayed by approximately 10 hours, with the mother, who was two months pregnant, being forced to wait during this time. Shah also recommended establishing a structured procedure for educational institutions to prevent similar situations in the future.

Priyank Kanungo, Chairperson of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), condemned the school for its insensitivity and efforts to cover up the incident, as well as the police for delaying the FIR. He mentioned that the Deputy Chief Minister of Maharashtra has taken strict actions against the officers involved, and the NCPCR plans to take severe measures against the school administration for attempting to suppress the case. A team from the NCPCR will be sent to investigate the matter further.

Post-FIR action by the Maharashtra government:

The Maharashtra government has suspended three police officials, including a senior inspector, for alleged dereliction of duty in handling the Badlapur sexual assault case and has transferred the investigation to a Special Investigation Team (SIT). The SIT will function under under IPS officer Arti Singh. Deputy Chief Minister and Home Minister Devendra Fadnavis confirmed these suspensions on social media platform X, highlighting the immediate suspension of the senior inspector, assistant sub-inspector, and head constable involved. However, these actions have done little to ease public outrage.

As per multiple media reports, in response to the mounting pressure by the people of Maharashtra, the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO) also issued a stern warning, stating that legal action would be taken if the school management is found negligent. It is essential to highlight that the school management has suspended the principal, a class teacher, and a female attendant.

CM Shinde also reportedly instructed the Thane Police Commissioner to prioritize the case and called for a review to ensure the establishment of Sakhi Savitri committees in all schools, which are intended to protect students.

Additionally, Shinde proposed several measures to improve school safety and prevent future incidents, including the installation of complaint boxes in every school and stricter oversight of staff who interact regularly with students. The government has established a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to thoroughly investigate the case and ensure justice is served.

Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis announced that senior lawyer Ujjwal Nikam would serve as the special public prosecutor for the case and assured that the trial would be expedited in a Fast Track court. Chief Minister Eknath Shinde has also ordered a high-level investigation and reiterated that an SIT would be formed. It is essential to note that Ujjwal Nikam, who was previously fielded by the BJP against Congress’s Gaikwad Varsha Eknath in a recent Lok Sabha election, lost despite being chosen over two-time MP Poonam Mahajan for the Mumbai North Central seat.

Questions raised by the opposition parties against lawlessness in Maharashtra

The ruling government of Maharashtra has also come under severe criticism for responding to the outpouring of people’s anger with filing of reverse FIRs against the demonstrators, registering complaints against 300 individuals and arresting more than 40 with charges of rioting, stone-pelting, disrupting train services, and clashing with police. After receiving criticism for filing FIRs against the protestors itself, CM Shinde deemed the Badlapur protest to be politically motivated, with most protestors being outsiders and not locals.

Maharashtra CM Eknath Shinde alleges the massive protest over #BadlapurCrime is politically motivated. He claims opposition could not digest the success of their Ladli Bahena scheme, therefore the politically motivated protest against this case happened.

— Sudhir Suryawanshi (@ss_suryawanshi) August 21, 2024

On August 21, Senior Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut announced that the opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) will call for a Maharashtra Bandh on August 24 in response to the Badlapur school sexual assault case. Raut stated that while MVA allies had convened to discuss seat-sharing for the upcoming state assembly elections, they chose to postpone that discussion in light of the current situation.

“The people of Maharashtra are outraged, and FIRs have been filed against those who protested. We have decided that on August 24, MVA will call for a Maharashtra Bandh over the Badlapur incident,” Raut said.

#WATCH | Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut says, “…We had come here to discuss seat sharing but then we thought that we would not discuss seat sharing and instead discuss the law and order in the state after the Badlapur incident. The people of Maharashtra are agitated and… pic.twitter.com/4LoFpEZoly

— ANI (@ANI) August 21, 2024

UBT Sena Rajya Sabha MP Priyanka Chaturvedi –extremely vocal on the recent Kolkata rape and murder of a young woman doctor, also expressed her outrage over the incident. She joined other opposition leaders in criticizing the delay in filing the FIR, contrasting it with the police’s swift action against protesters.

Incident occurred on 13th August
FIR registered on 16th August
Kesarkar holds his press conference on 20th August AFTER protests erupt.

The school did not report the incident to cops, only when the child complained to her mother did the parents get her medically tested privately… https://t.co/TVhohZjvgv

— Priyanka Chaturvedi (@priyankac19) August 20, 2024

Chaturvedi also put out a social media post on how a woman journalist covering the Baldapur sexual assault case was asked by Waman Mhatre, former Badlapur Mayor and a leader of the Shinde-led Shiv Sena part, if she had been sexually assaulted herself. As per Chaturvedi;s post, the journalist has filed a complaint against the same with the police.

Meet Waman Mhatre former Badlapur Mayor and Mindhe Sena Leader.
Now hear his thoughts, told a woman journalist, you are covering this Badlapur news as if you yourself have been sexually assaulted.
Glad the journalist has refused to take his nonsense and has asked Police to file… pic.twitter.com/RqP0S0ABs1

— Priyanka Chaturvedi (@priyankac19) August 20, 2024

Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray called for a fast-track trial, alleging that the school involved in the case had ties to BJP leaders. He criticised the government for failing to protect women despite promoting initiatives like the Mukhyamantri Ladki Bahin scheme, which provides a monthly amount to women of Maharashtra to encourage their empowerment. Thackeray further condemned the politicization of crimes against women, particularly in targeting certain states.

NCP (Sharad Pawar faction) Lok Sabha MP Supriya Sule questioned the delay in registering the FIR and demanded an inquiry into the police’s inaction. Sule had incidentally not spoken on the recent horrific gang rape of a woman doctor at a hospital in Kolkata.

In addition to question the conduct of the Maharashtra police, many opposition leaders also pointed finger at the ruling state government’s decision to appoint Nikam as the public prosecutor in the Badlapur case. Allegation of the school where the incident took place being run by people associated with the BJP were also raised.

Congress leader Aslam Shaikh criticised the state government, highlighting the increase in crime, particularly against women, in Thane—Chief Minister Eknath Shinde’s own district. Shaikh questioned how the public could trust Advocate Ujjwal Nikam, the special public prosecutor appointed to the case, given his recent affiliation with the BJP. He demanded accountability from the Chief Minister, stating that the rise in crime rates and the failure to protect women reflected poorly on the government’s leadership.

The police administration’s consistent failure to act until public outrage erupts has led to a complete breakdown of law and order in our state. In the land of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, where women’s safety should be paramount, our mothers and sisters are now vulnerable. The… pic.twitter.com/szIySwCKFk

— Aslam Shaikh, INC (@AslamShaikh_MLA) August 21, 2024

Opposition Leader Vijay Wadettiwar opposed Ujjwal Nikam’s appointment as the public prosecutor in the Badlapur case, arguing that the school’s connection to the BJP and Nikam’s association with the party could compromise the pursuit of justice. Wadettiwar demanded that the trial be expedited and concluded within three months, with the accused facing the death penalty.

महाराष्ट्राला लाजवेल अशी घटना मुख्यमंत्र्यांच्या ठाणे जिल्ह्यात घडली. आरोपींवर कारवाई करणे सोडून न्याय मागणाऱ्या आंदोलकांवर लाठी चार्ज केला गेला.
हे सगळं कोणासाठी?
कोणाला वाचवण्यासाठी?

मुख्यमंत्री आणि गृहमंत्री दोघांनी राजीनामा देऊन महाराष्ट्राची माफी मागावी. महायुती… pic.twitter.com/hTWkY6mwsy

— Vijay Wadettiwar (@VijayWadettiwar) August 21, 2024

Related:

Maharashtra: Swift action on protesters, delayed justice for sexual assault against minors, police priorities need to be questioned

India’s cry for justice: The brutal Kolkata rape-murder of a young doctor has ignited nationwide protests on the eve of the 78th Independence’s Day

The illusion of the glamourous Malayalam cinema falls apart: Justice Hema Committee report provides insight into systematic harassment and exploitation of women actors

Caste and Indifference: Two separate incidents of rape against minor Dalit girls in UP and Bihar receive no media coverage, protest or outrage

The post Maharashtra: Two minor girls sexually assaulted, delay in FIR, failure of accountability, attempts to cover up crime appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Background of the incidents:

According to a previous report in Sabrang India, several Hindu right-wing organisations including Sakal Hindu Samaj, one of the leading right-wing organisations known for organising communal and provocative events and rallies to target minorities of this country specially Muslims, had called a Protest March to condemn alleged atrocities on members of the minority community in Bangladesh. The protests in Maharashtra were fuelled by recent reports of escalating violence against the Hindu community in Bangladesh, particularly following the fall of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s government on August 5. The Bangladesh National Hindu Grand Alliance has reported a surge in attacks against minorities, with incidents and threats documented in 278 locations across 48 districts.

Nashik

On Friday, August 16, in the Bhadrakali area of Nashik in Maharashtra witnessed heightened chaos and tensions during the ‘bandh’ (Protest) called by right-wing extremist organisation Sakal Hindu Samaj, an umbrella body of several outfits, leading to violence where police lobbed tear gas shells to disperse the crowd.

Nashik Police Commissioner Sandeep Karnik provided details on the response to the violence: “Six tear gas shells and one rubber bullet were fired to disperse the crowd. Around six police officers were injured. Police personnel, including State Reserve Police Force (SRPF) jawans, were deployed in the area to maintain peace.”

#WATCH | Maharashtra: Violence broke out in Nashik, earlier today, during the protest march over the Bangladesh issue. pic.twitter.com/oFJSu4WOKw

— ANI (@ANI) August 16, 2024

The unrest began in the afternoon when members of the Sakal Hindu Samaj organised a protest march and motorbike rally. Tensions escalated as the demonstrators reached Bhadrakali and observed that some shops had defied the bandh and remained open. What began as verbal disputes soon erupted into stone-throwing and clashes, resulting in damage to several vehicles and exacerbating the already volatile situation. The police have managed to de-escalate the situation. 

Clashes erupted in Jalgaon: Stones Hurled at Showroom

On August 16, in Jalgaon, another protest by the Sakal Hindu Samaj led to violence when stones were thrown at a vehicle showroom. According to an official report, “The incident occurred in Jalgaon city this morning during a protest march by the Sakal Hindu Samaj against anti-Hindu violence in Bangladesh. Some unidentified persons hurled a few stones at a two-wheeler showroom.”

The official added that the situation was tense initially but was brought under control with police intervention. To prevent further escalation, additional police personnel were deployed across the city.

Hindu religious leader’s remarks against Prophet sparks row

Hindu religious leader Ramgiri Maharaj’s remarks against Prophet Mohammad and Islam sparked controversy in Maharashtra, resulting in police cases being filed in Nashik and Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. 

The communal tension erupted after the video of a remark by Maharaj, during his sermon at the ‘Akhand Harinam Saptah’ at Shree Kshetra Panchale in Sinnar tehsil of Nashik district, went viral. He allegedly made the controversial remark while speaking on the situation of Hindus in Bangladesh. After the video went viral, on Thursday night, thousands of people from a community took to the streets in Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar and Vaijapur to protest.

On Friday over alleged objectionable remarks made by the Hindu religious leader Ramgiri Maharaj against the Prophet Mohammad and Islam ended in police filing cases against him in two districts of Maharashtra following complaints by members of the Muslim community. The remarks were made recently by Ramgiri Maharaj at Shah Panchale village in Sinnar taluka of Nashik district during a religious event and its video went viral on social media, police said.

The FIR in Vaijapur was filed under section 302 (uttering words with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings of any person) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) based on a complaint lodged by a local resident, the police said. The complainant in the case, Rafehasan Ali Khan, said he came to know about the video of Ramgiri Maharaj in which he was heard saying, among other things, that one crore Muslims have abandoned Islam and also passed a comment against Prophet Mohammad.

Former MP from AIMIM for Aurangabad constituency, Imtiaz Jaleel, has alleged a political plot behind the controversial statement of Maharaj, slamming him for making statements which would create hatred in society. “It’s a political plot. If you look at the statement, it’s clear that someone wrote it and Ramgiri Maharaj just read out the script on the directions of someone,” he said.

Who is Ramgiri Maharaj?

Mahant Ramgiri Maharaj is chief of the ‘Sadguru Gangagiri Maharaj Sansthan’ based in Sarala Island (Godavari River) in Shrirampur tehsil of Ahmednagar district. The sansthan has a 177-year-old tradition of organising ‘Akhand Harinam Saptah’. Lakhs of devotees from nearby districts attend the sermons during this week. Ramgiri Maharaj also gives sermons periodically at various places and has big followers in Nashik, Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar and Ahmednagar districts. Due to his large following, many politicians of the region, including MLAs and local body leaders, attend or organise ‘Harinam Saptah’.

“These words by Ramgiri Maharaj have hurt the religious sentiments of Muslims and created a rift between the two communities,” the complainant said. Tension prevailed for some time on Friday afternoon in part of Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar city after a group of Muslims gathered outside the City Chowk police station to demand action against Ramgiri Maharaj. Jaleel wrote a letter to the city police commissioner to seek action against the Hindu religious leader. The statements were made deliberately to malign the image of the Muslim community, he alleged. Reported Economic Times

Police have imposed section 144 in the area to restrict public gathering. They also registered a case in Yeola in Nashik district and registered another FIR at Sangamner in Ahmednagar after residents gathered and demanded action against Maharaj for hurting religious sentiments. A crowd also blocked the Ahmednagar-Sambhaji Nagar Road for some time.

Divisive, majoritarian background of Sakal Hindu Samaj

Sakal Hindu Samaj is an umbrella organisation of several Hindutva organisations including Hindu Janajagruti Samiti (HJS), Shiv Pratishtha and Sanatan Sanstha. They regularly organise such events and give platform to those who promote hard-core divisive and violent ideology in the name of protection of the Hindu religion. Citizens for Justice and Peace has been monitoring and tracking the these events and rallies organised by the Sakal Hindu Samaj, many events for the month of August may be planned in various parts of Maharashtra. From August 4, ‘Hindu Jan Aakrosh Morchas” led by the Sakal Hindu Samaj, right wing-supported umbrella body of the Hindutva organisation, started organising events and rallies with provocative hate speeches against minorities. First held in late 2022, these rallies involve members marching through cities with saffron flags and headwear, followed by speeches against the Muslim community. 

Hindu right-wing organisations such as Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Sanatan Sanstha organised about two dozen such marches in various parts of the state last year. Hindu Sakal Samaj has been notorious for organising events and calling people who are known to deliver hate speeches in the past. 

Related:

Maharashtra: Another hate event organised by Sakal Hindu Samaj, Bharatanand Saraswati delivers anti-Muslim hate speech

Defiant of the SC, Suresh Chavhanke, Raja Singh & Hindutva outfits escalate hate to dangerous levels

“Protect religion, women and cows,” right wing groups tell the youth, hands them Trishuls

The post Violence erupts in Maharashtra amid protest march organised by the Sakal Hindu Samaj appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Background and allegations

The election, which saw Waikar secure victory by a mere 48 votes over Shiv Sena (UBT) candidate Amol Kirtikar, has been mired in controversy. Kirtikar has claimed large-scale manipulation and irregularities in the counting process and is preparing to challenge the election results in court. A detailed story on this can be read at Sabrang.

Suchitra Krunal Amle Patil, an additional assistant election adjudicating officer, lodged the complaint leading to the FIR. She was assigned to the NESCO centre in Goregaon, where the vote counting took place. On June 4, Patil received a report that a mobile phone, strictly prohibited inside the centre, had been found. The device in question was allegedly used by Pandilkar, handed to him by Gurav despite clear regulations against such actions.

Legal implications and police investigation

The FIR against Pandilkar and Gurav is registered under Sections 188 and 134 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 134 of The Representation of the People Act. The police have requested CCTV footage from the Election Commission’s returning officer and are scrutinizing the call records to determine the purpose and extent of the mobile phone usage.

As reported by Mid-day, a police officer involved in the case stated, “We will check call records to see whom Pandilkar had called and for what purpose. The reason why he was using the mobile phone inside the centre will also be ascertained. We will also arrest Pandilkar and Gurav for violating EC rules and guidelines during the counting of votes.”

Reactions from the parties involved

Kirtikar and his supporters have been vocal about their concerns regarding the fairness of the election. The discovery of the mobile phone inside the counting centre adds to the list of grievances Kirtikar has cited, which include allegations of EVM tampering and procedural lapses in the handling of voting equipment.

Waikar, who has maintained his innocence, is facing increased scrutiny as the investigation progresses. The close margin of his victory has only intensified the spotlight on the allegations.

Moving forward

As the investigation unfolds, the spotlight remains on the integrity of the electoral process in one of Mumbai’s key constituencies. The case not only questions the specific incidents of alleged malpractice but also raises broader concerns about the mechanisms in place to ensure free and fair elections.

Amol Kirtikar’s pursuit of legal recourse and the police investigation’s findings will be pivotal in determining the next steps. With the stakes so high, transparency and adherence to due process are paramount to maintaining public trust in the democratic process.

The unfolding events in Mumbai North West are a reminder of the critical importance of vigilance and integrity in electoral practices, as they form the cornerstone of a functioning democracy.

Related :

The post FIR filed against relative of winning candidate in mumbai north west election over alleged protocol breach appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The FIRs have been registered under sections 153A (promoting enmity between groups on ground of religion etc.), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke) and 506 (criminal intimidation) and other relevant provisions of the IPC. These developments that have taken nearly three months to unfold and only after citizens approached the Bombay High Court.

On February 3, 2024, citizens of Mira Road-Bhayander had lodged a complaint with the local police against MLA Geeta Jan for delivering hate speech. NO FIR was registered. The Citizens for Justice & Peace (CJP) had filed complaints against Rane earlier this year. On April 2, CJP’s complaint to the jurisdictional police at Dongri, Mumbai and Thane flagged the hate speeches of the BJP MLA from Kankavli, Nitish Rane. He had made the incendiary speech in Dongri on February 27 and thereafter in Thane accusing the Muslim Minority — of ‘land jihad’ and threatened to evict them. He said he will burn them in a generator, terming the residents as illegal Bangladeshis. Additionally, he warned the police to take law and order in his own hand if the police did not comply with his directives. Three previous complaints related to hate speech and events in January-February 2024 were filed on February 23 this year. CJP has invoked recent orders of the Supreme Court in the Shaheen Abdullah Case (WP (C) 940/2022) to approach jurisdictional officers and district magistrates (DMs) with these complaints while also ensuring that the Director General of Police is cognisant of these citizens’ actions.

 Today, April 23, Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegavkar also told the Bombay High court that 13 cases have been registered regarding the violence that erupted in Mira Road between January 22 and January 26, 2024. A division bench of Justice Revati Mohite-Dere and Justice Manjusha Deshpande directed the State to file an affidavit on this by June 12, and kept the case for further hearing on June 19. The court was dealing with a writ petition seeking action against MLAs Nitesh Rane, Geeta Jain, and T Raja for allegedly delivering hate speeches and inciting violence.

Senior Advocate Gayatri Singh for the petitioners relied on Amish Devgan v. Union of India and submitted that section 295A should be invoked. Venegavkar said that the investigation has commenced and the Police Commissioners will decide whether section 295A should be invoked.

The court had earlier directed the Mumbai and Mira Bhayander Police Commissioners to review recordings and transcripts of alleged hate speeches by BJP MLAs Nitesh Rane, Geeta Jain, and T Raja and inform the court if FIRs will be registered against them. The court had also directed the police to take necessary preventive action to ensure communal harmony and maintain law and order during the Ram Navami festival on April 17, 2024.

The petition, filed by five residents of Mumbai, highlighted instances of alleged hate speeches delivered by the MLAs in January at various locations, including Mira Road, Govandi, Ghatkopar, and Malvani.

The court had expressed the opinion opined that prima facie; certain offences appeared to have been committed based on the speech transcripts. To ensure impartiality and avoid political pressure, the court instructed the police commissioners to personally examine the videos and transcripts of the speeches.

The petitioners before the High Court also brought to the notice of the court the fact that MLA Nitesh Rane held the press conference at the press room and the office of the Mira-Bhayander Commissioner of Police, on January 23, 2024, to make the alleged hate speech. The court remarked that police premises should not be used for events to maintain the citizens’ trust in the impartiality of the police.

The five petitioners are residents of Mumbai, and two of them are victims of the violence in Mira Road, a satellite city of Mumbai. The petitioners have claimed that they made multiple attempts to get the authorities to take action against the accused for hate speech. However, the police failed to take action.

The petition alleged that the police failed to register FIRs against these individuals, despite clear directives from the Supreme Court mandating suo moto action in such cases to preserve India’s secular character. The petition referred to Supreme Court orders dated October 21, 2022, and January 13, 2023, which instructed all states and union territories to take immediate action against hate speech. The petitioners claim that the inaction of the police, despite several media reports, violates these orders and the rule of law.

The petition detailed several incidents where alleged hate speeches led to unrest and violence in various locations, including Mira Road, Govandi, and Ghatkopar. The petition argues that such speeches could trigger further violence and disrupt the upcoming elections.

The petitioners have sought directions to the police to register FIRs against MLAs Nitesh Rane, Geeta Jain, and T. Raja under sections 153, 153A, 153B, 295A, 504, and 505 of the IPC for allegedly having delivered hate speeches in Mira Road, Govandi, and Ghatkopar on various dates.

Related:

Bombay High Court: Plea seeking FIR against three BJP legislators for delivering hate speeches, highlights inaction by police even after Supreme Court guidelines

Bombay HC directs two police commissioners to personally examine videos of speeches delivered by BJP MLA Nitesh Rana, Geeta Jain and T. Raja Singh

The post FIRs for hate speech registered against BJP MLAs Nitesh Rane and Geeta Jain: Maharashtra Police to Bombay High Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

After the attack, a second FIR was filed against Wagle at the Parvati police station in Pune where he and several others, which includes organisers of the Nirbhay Bano event in Pune, are now subjects of an FIR. The FIR is based on charges for violation of a police notice. The list of named people in the FIR has members of various political parties, such as Dhiraj Ghate, the Pune unit chief of the BJP along with 250 party members, Arvind Shinde, the Congress party city chief, Prashant Jagtap representing the Sharad Pawar faction of the Nationalist Congress Party, and Sanjay More from Shiv Sena. Furthermore, the social media site X was also trending with people calling for his arrest. 

Meanwhile, on Saturday, ten members of the BJP were arrested in Pune in connection with the assault on senior journalist Nikhil Wagle. The arrested people have been identified as Deepak Pote, Ganesh Ghosh, Ganesh Sherla, Raghvendra Mankar, Swapnil Naik, Pratik Desarda, Dushyant Mohol, Datta Sagre, Girish Mankar, and Rahul Paygude. Several charges have been filed against them which include sections of the Indian Penal Code related to rioting and voluntarily causing harm.

Prior to the attack, BJP Pune’s president Dheeraj Ghate reportedly commented on the incident on X, associating Wagle with ‘naxalism’. There is thus far no news or reports of Ghate being arrested as of yet. 

*आम्ही जे बोलतो ते करतोच…!!*
स्वतःला पुरोगामी म्हणवणाऱ्या परंतु सत्यता बघितले तर नक्षलवादाला खतपाणी घालणाऱ्या निखिल वागळेने ऋषीतुल्य व्यक्तिमत्व भारतरत्न लालकृष्ण आडवाणी जी आणि देशाचे आदरणीय पंतप्रधान नरेंद्र जी मोदी यांच्या बद्दल स्वतःच्या प्रसिद्धीसाठी आक्षेपार्य विधान करून… pic.twitter.com/Dr8XypZqzA

— Dheeraj Ghate (@DheerajGhate) February 9, 2024

Meanwhile, the Indian Express has reported that Nikhil Wagle’s team, with Vishwambhar Choudhary and Asim Sarode, has called for the arrest of Dheeraj Ghate and other party figures purportedly after the attack on Wagle. 

On February 11, Sunil Deodhar from the BJP called for the arrest of journalist Nikhil Wagle who according to him has made “objectionable” remarks directed at Prime Minister Narendra Modi and former Deputy Prime Minister L K Advani.

According to reports, Deodhar has stated that he has lodged a formal complaint with the Pune police on February 8 against Nikhil Wagle, which he has done because of “offensive tweet” by Wagle posted on February 6. The FIR, filed at Vishrambaug police station, books Wagle for charges against his remarks under IPC sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups), 500 (defamation) and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief). 

According to the report, Pune Police Commissioner Amitesh Kumar stated that an investigation into the matter is currently ongoing. Furthermore, a senior police official has stated to the newspaper that there are no immediate plans to arrest Wagle in connection with the case and the decision to arrest him will only be made after the investigation is complete. 

Wagle’s car was brutally attacked on February 9 in Pune with scores of people hitting his car with hockey sticks, stone, and iron rods resulting in smashed windows of the car and injured passenger. Wagle was informed about a tense atmosphere after he made a tweet by the police.

The police have issued a public statement saying that they had asked Wagle not to leave for the event until all the protestors were detained. However, the police has stated, that due to traffic the detaining people began to take time, but Wagle did not take note and left for the event and even ‘changed routes.’ However the police has stated that they had plainclothes police personnel following him for his safety. About the attacked they have stated that, “When the car was attacked, the plainclothes policemen standing between agitators and Wagle’s car tried to stop the attack, but heavy traffic and bystanders ruled out the possibility of using force of evacuating him and his car immediately.”

Speaking to Sabrang India after the incident, Nikhil Wagle narrated about how the events took place, “The fact that we survived was a chamatkaar (miracle). We were about to die, but got saved. This was a mob lynching. We were surrounded in all directions and chased. I’ve been attacked even before this, but this was the worst.” Further, he says that the attack took place in police presence, “The police came with us, but the police did not protect us.”

“The police stopped us at Asim Sarode’s house – this was a house arrest. They kept telling us to stop for half an hour, ten minutes more. But finally I decided to leave and I told the police I have committed to the people.” He further goes on to say that the stone-pelting started soon after they took to the road.

Meanwhile a BJP leader from Pune has reportedly stated that the party workers agitated against Wagle because of his own statements. According to the Indian Express, BJP spokesperson Sandeep Khardekar has said that, “Both actions are condemnable. The attack on Wagle’s car is condemnable, and his disparaging remarks against PM Modi and LK Advani are even more condemnable. Our party workers would not have done what they did if they were not instigated by Wagle’s objectionable comment. Wagle stooped very low but no one took him to task. Why are people silent on his derogatory comment?”

Related:

Media fraternity stands with Nikhil Wagle after attack, EGI, PCI, NWMI release statements in support

Debunking Myths: A Critical Analysis of Hindu American Foundation’s Ram Temple Narrative

Around the inauguration of Ram Temple, communal tension erupted in Uttar Pradesh

The post 10 arrested after attack against senior Marathi journalist appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This article will argue that the F.I.R is a Public Document and how and why it still remains “concealed’ from citizens

What is an F.I.R?

Although not mentioned as ‘First Information Report’ in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, an F.I.R is the information relating to the commission of a Cognisable offence[1]. If transmitted orally to an officer in charge of a Police Station, it should be written by him or under his direction and be read over to whoever has so informed him (of the crimes committed).

This is laid down in Section 154 of the CrPC. Section 154(2) states that the document be handed over to the informant, free of cost. Access to F.I.R, as far as the CrPC is concerned, is given to the informant and lies with the police officer.

F.I.R as a Public Document

What is a Public Document?

Section 74 of the Indian Evidence act, 1872 defines Public Documents as Documents forming the acts, or records of the acts of the sovereign authority, or of official bodies and tribunals, and of public officers, legislative, judicial and executive, of any part of India or of the Commonwealth, or of a foreign country; public records kept in any State of private documents.

What is the consequence of something being a Public Document?

Section 76 of the Evidence Act states that if a person, having a right to inspect, demands a copy of a public document, the public officer having the custody of a Public Document on payment of legal fees shall provide the document.

There have been a series of legal pronouncements declaring the F.I.R as a Public Document.

In Chinnappa Anandappa Reddy vs State, the Karnataka High Court declared that the F.I.R is a public document under the Indian Evidence Act, as it is a record of the acts of a public officer in discharge of the official duty. In a revision petition filed against a Taluka Magistrate who refused to give the petitioners a copy of the F.I.R, the court stated that the Taluka Magistrate was legally bound to give the copy asked for, and the Magistrate had no authority to refuse it, making the refusal illegal and reprehensible.[2]

In Panchanan Mondal vs The State, the Calcutta High Court remarked, on the fact that the petitioner in that case was not supplied with the F.I.R, that the question of prejudice of the accused on account of the denial of the copy of the F. I. R. at the earlier stage therefore assumes greater importance. It held that it is expedient in the interests of justice that a certified copy of the first information report, which is a public document, should be granted to the accused on his payment of the legal fees therefore at any stage.[3]

In Jayantibhai Lalubhai Patel vs. State of Gujarat, the Gujarat High Court held that whenever an F.I.R is registered against the accused, a copy of it is forwarded to the Court- making it a public document. Considering the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution and the provisions of Section 74 of the Indian Evidence Act- the Accused has right to inspect the F.I.R under Section 76 of the Evidence Act.[4]

In Mohammed Khalid Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court stated that F.I.R. is the starting point of the investigation and that investigation can only start after an F.I.R. has been recorded. The court pointed out, when the state submitted that the secrecy of investigation should be maintained, that there is no reason for the accused to not have the F.I.R especially when the informant whose access to the F.I.R is mandated in the CrPC, is allowed to share the F.I.R with anyone.[5]

In COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION THROUGH MR. AJAY CHAUDHARY vs. State, the Delhi High Court made significant contributions to the discussion on whether the accused is entitled to a copy of the F.I.R after it is lodged, and if so, what steps are required to be taken to facilitate it availability.

The court gave its directions, stating that the accused is entitled to get a copy of F.I.R at an earlier stage than prescribed under Section 207 of the CrPC. It also directed that the copies of F.I.R should be uploaded on the Delhi Police Website withing twenty-four hours of lodging of the F.I.R unless the offence is sensitive in nature.

When a person is refused the copy of F.I.R due to it being “sensitive” in nature, the person, after disclosing the identity, could submit a representation with the Commissioner of Police who would constitute a committee of three high officers and the committee shall deal with the said grievance within three days from the receipt of the representation and communicate it to the grieved person, the court directed.

Here, even though the Court recorded the importance of individual liberty especially in criminal proceedings, we see a contrasting direction where the scope of sensitive nature of the F.I.R is left to the Competent Authority to decide without laying any limits to this power.[6]

The Supreme Court had given an order in 2016 in the case of Youth Bar Association of India vs. Union of India, which is similar to the Delhi High Court’s order regarding the directions issued on accused’s entitlement of an F.I.R.

The Supreme Court noted that an accused is entitled to get a copy of the F.I.R at an earlier stage than is prescribed in the CrPC. An accused who has reasons to suspect that he has been roped in a criminal case and his name may be finding place in a first information report, can submit an application for grant of a certified copy of the F.I.R and such copy should be provided within 24 hours.

One important exception to this rule, as stated by the Supreme Court was that the offences should “not be sensitive” in nature.

The Supreme Court went on to detail out what the sensitive offences could be- like sexual offences, offences pertaining to insurgency, terrorism and of that category, offences under POCSO Act and such other offences.

In these cases, if the F.I.R is not provided to the Accused, the person aggrieved could approach the Commissioner who would later appoint a three-member committee to address the grievance; this committee should deal with the grievance in 3 days and communicate it to the aggrieved person. It is important to note that even this list by the Supreme Court detailing what constitutes a sensitive offence is not exhaustive. The court itself has stated that the list is merely illustrative.

This could be considered as the current position of Indian Law on the entitlement of an Accused to an F.I.R.

To conclude, an accused is entitled to an F.I.R generally, unless the offence is of “sensitive nature”. This is supported by various High Court decisions and the Supreme Court’s order in Youth Bar Association case. However, the ‘sensitive nature’ exception seriously impedes on the freedoms on the individual and enlarges the scope of arbitrary state power to not give any accused a fair opportunity to know about the status of the case in which he/she is facing allegations in.

Given that the State could still deem a matter sensitive and not provide an F.I.R to an accused like it did in the case of Prabir Purkayashta even without the Supreme Court’s order listing the types of sensitive cases, the Supreme Court’s listing down of offences that could be sensitive in nature, would stop at being informative in nature. This power does derail the constitutional safeguards under Article 21. Therefore, a more individual centric jurisprudence needs to evolve to safeguard the liberty of individual against state action.

(The author is a legal researcher with the organisation)

[1]  A cognizable offence is one in which a police officer can make an arrest without the need for a warrant or the consent or order of the magistrate

[2]  1980 CriLJ 1022

[3] 1971 Cri. LJ 875

[4] 1992 CriLJ 2377

[5] Criminal Application No. 709 of 2010 decided on 4 March 2010

[6] 2011 CriLJ 1347

Also Read

Rajasthan’s Gig Worker Law, a step towards industrial democracy

According to Article 370, what does “autonomy” mean for Jammu and Kashmir?

‘Reorganisation’ of J & K into two union territories, constitutional? Part III of the analysis in the 370 case

The post Contrary to what many might think, the FIR is a public document appeared first on SabrangIndia.

#WATCH | The State government has filed an FIR against the members of the Editors Guild who are trying to create more clashes in the state of Manipur, says CM N Biren Singh. pic.twitter.com/gm2RssgoHL

— ANI (@ANI) September 4, 2023

The EGI defines itself as a premier, non-partisan association of editorial leaders across India and in its statement to the public, the EGI has stated that they had received “representation” from various civil society as well as the Indian Army that there was partisan and biased media coverage of Manipur. 

EGI statement on the FIRs. 

Statement by the Executive Committee of the Editors Guild of India on the FIRs registered by the Manipur police against the Guild, as well as the intimidatory remarks made by the Chief Minister of Manipur pic.twitter.com/MHvrYT8ufj

— Editors Guild of India (@IndEditorsGuild) September 5, 2023

At today’s hearing the EGI members were represented by senior Advocate Shyam Divan who conveyed their concerns to the bench, comprising of Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra. Consequently, the bench issued a notice to the State of Manipur regarding the writ petition filed by the EGI members and also scheduled a hearing for the upcoming Monday, according to LiveLaw.

The main issue revolves around the EGI’s fact-finding report. This report was released in New Delhi last week following the committee’s visit to Manipur, has garnered substantial attention. It criticised media coverage of the ethnic violence as one-sided and also accused the state leadership of displaying partiality in the conflict. The EGI has stated that the government should have maintained a neutral stance, representing the entire state impartially.

The president of the EGI, along with three editors, Seema Guha, Bharat Bhushan, and Sanjay Kapoor had gone on a visit to Manipur last month. Their aim was to closely examine media coverage of the ethnic violence in the region.

The FIRs filed against the EGI members also pinpointed a specific error within the report, according to Deccan Herald. The FIRs pointed that the report had inaccurately captioned a photograph of a burning building in Manipur’s Churachandpur district as a “Kuki house.” In reality, the building in question was a Forest Department office that had been set ablaze by a mob on May 3, coinciding with the outbreak of large-scale violence in the district and other parts of Manipur.

Promptly addressing this error, the EGI acknowledged it on the social media platform X. They assured that the error in the photo caption was being rectified, and an updated report with the corrected information would replace the incorrect version.

There was an error in a photo caption in the report released on Sep 2. The same is being rectified and updated report will be uploaded on the link shortly. We regret the error that crept in at the photo editing stage

— Editors Guild of India (@IndEditorsGuild) September 3, 2023

The Supreme Court’s decision to grant interim protection now sets a precedent for the protection of a free press from state prosecution. 

Manipur has been gripped by ethnic violence for more than four months, resulting in the tragic loss of 170 lives, with 700 individuals sustaining injuries. Additionally, this conflict has forced approximately 70,000 people from the Meitei and Kuki communities to be displaced.

Related 

World Press Freedom Index: India rank further slides to 161, 11 spots behind Afghanistan

A fair media can defang intolerance

TO BE LIKE RIVERS- Reimagining India in Authoritarian Times, a soul cry from India’s North East

Press Club of India condemns FIR against Editor’s Guild of India (EGI), criminalising journalism

The post Supreme Court shields Editors Guild of India after multiple FIRs filed for Manipur Reportage appeared first on SabrangIndia.

-CJI Chandrachud to SG Tushar Mehta

The Supreme Court on Monday, July 31, said that the sexual violence incident in Manipur cannot be justified by saying that “this and this happened elsewhere”.

“We are dealing with something of unprecedented magnitude of violence against women in communal and sectarian violence. It cannot be said that crimes are happening against women and in Bengal also. But here the case is different. We cannot justify what happened in Manipur by saying that this and this happened elsewhere,” said Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud.

The apex court made these remarks while hearing a petition filed by two women from the Kuki community who were paraded naked by a mob of men on May 4.The incident occurred in B. Phainom village in Kangpokpi district, a day after the ongoing ethnic clashes between the Meiteis and Kukis began. However, while the Print had reported this in May 2023, the video went viral only on July 19, following which there was widespread outrage at the brutality and impunity with which the women were assaulted.

Since May 2023, when matters were first mentioned before a vacation bench of the Supreme Court, there has been a lot of confusion surrounding the steps that will be taken by the Supreme Court of India regarding the ongoing violence in Manipur. The Supreme Court has now demanded answers from the State and Union Governments. 

In the past few days, many different reports have surfaced, some of which suggested that the cases registered against the crimes committed in the state will no longer be handled by the Manipur police, but rather be taken over by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Reportedly, requests were also being made to conduct an independent investigation into the crimes committed to ensure justice is meted out. It is essential to note here that CBI is a central agency, under the direct aegis of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)  and there have been allegations that the violence ensuing the state of Manipur for the past three months is targeted against a minority community and is alleged to be “state-sponsored”.

On July 31, eleven days after the Supreme Court had first taken suo-moto cognizance after a video of two Kuki women being paraded naked surfaced on the internet, the SC heard a batch of petitions filed in relation to the violence in Manipur. Many essential questions were raised in the hearing today, regarding the inaction and compliance of the police with the perpetrators, the necessity of independent probe, and unprecedented magnitude of violence against women. The petitioners also dealt with the issue of taking statements from the survivors of rape and sexual violence, and the need to ensure that the survivors who come forward are protested. The Supreme Court also called for evolving a broad mechanism to deal with violence against women in violence-hit Manipur.

CJI questions police inaction, government indifference

The Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, demanded answer from the Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, regarding the inaction of the police in the incident of Kuki women being paraded naked. 

“What stood in the way of police registering the FIR immediately on May 4?” CJI asked SG Mehta, who was representing the State Government. 

To this, SG replied that May 18 was the date Zero FIR was registered. He also informed the Bench that within 24 hours of the video surfacing, seven arrests were made.

On the same, the CJI continued and asked, “Was the local police unaware that such an incident took place? And why was the FIR transferred to the Magistrate on the June 20? After one month”, as reported by LiveLaw.

Questions were raised by the bench, also comprising of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, regarding total number of FIRs filed during the period of ongoing violence.

“You also said there are about 6000 FIRs. What is the bifurcation? How many involve offences against women? How many involve other serious offences like murder, arson, burning down houses? What is the bifurcation between offences against body, offences against properties, offences against places of worship?” the CJI sought to know, as reported by LiveLaw.

CJI also raised concerns about the condition of victims in relief camps and emphasised the need for a compassionate system to record their testimonies. He pointed out three months have elapsed since the violence broke out and key evidence must have got destroyed in this period. 

According to CJI Chandrachud, the viral video incident cannot be viewed as a stand-alone crime and was a result of systemic violence against women. 

He stated: “There are statements by the victims that they were handed over to the mob by police. This is not a situation like ‘Nirbhaya’. That was also horrific but it was isolated. This is not an isolated instance. Here we are dealing with systemic violence which IPC recognises as a special offence. In such case, is it not important that you should have a specialised team? There is a need in the State of Manipur to have a healing touch. Because the violence is continuing unabated”, as reported by LiveLaw.

During the hearing, the court discussed the idea of forming a committee to speak with the victims and record their testimonies before beginning with criminal procedures. Regarding this, the bench sought to know the details of the extent of legal aid provided to the victims and the measures undertaken by the state and union government for rehabilitation.

The bench has asked the SG and Attorney General for India to seek guidance from the relevant authorities about the concerns highlighted by the court. 

A committee of women judges

Additionally, the top court contemplated the formation of a committee of retired woman judges to probe incidents of sexual violence against women in Manipur.

“Merely entrusting to CBI or SIT (Special Investigation Team) would not be enough. We will have to picture a situation where a 19-year-old woman who has lost her family is in a relief camp. We cannot have her going to the magistrate. We have to ensure that the process of justice goes to her doorstep. We will constitute a committee of women judges and members of civil society, who will in turn get the assistance of members of civil societies,” the court said.

The court made these remarks while hearing the Union government’s plea on transferring the case of the two women to a different state.

The hearing will be continued at 2 pm tomorrow. The details sought by the bench are also to be submitted by tomorrow. 

Submissions made by the petitioners before the Bench

Women against transfer of case to CBI: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal:

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal appeared on behalf of the two Kuki women who were paraded naked by a mob of Meitei men on May 4, 2023. Mr. Sibal stated that the women were against the CBI probe into the case as well as the transfer of the trials to Assam. 

They (Union govt) have transferred the matter to CBI and they want to move the matter out of Assam. We’re against both”, Sibal said, as reported by Livelaw. 

As stated in the Livelaw report, Mr. Sibal raised questions on the conduct of the police in the violence that took place against the two women. He stated provided that based on the statements of the victims under Section 161 CrPC, it is clear that the “police collaborated with the perpetrators of violence”. 

“The police took them towards the crowd. First they stated that there was no ignition and then they abandoned them with the crowd. And they did what they did”, Sibal said in the court. 

Mr. Sibal also highlighted that the father and brother of one of the women were killed and their bodies are yet to be recovered. 

“One of the women- her father, brother killed. We still don’t have the bodies.”

Further highlighting the inaction of the police, Mr. Sibal stated that even though the incident took place on May 4 and a Zero FIR was registered on May 18, it was only after the video went viral and the Supreme Court took cognizance of the case did the police take action. He said that many such incidents would have happened; however, the Union Government, even today, does not know how many FIRs have been filed. “This shows the sad state of affairs”, he exclaimed, as stated in the LiveLaw report.

Mr. Sibal highlighted that the investigation must be by an agency in which the victims have confidence and which can be unbiased. He wondered how the facts supplied by the State police, which collaborated with the criminals, can be relied upon. 

Regarding the AG’s assurance regarding personal monitoring of the investigation, Sibal said, “How will the law officer or AG monitor? Monitor what?” The officers have not even informed the AG and SG how many FIRs have been registered! That’s the sad state of affairs”, as reported by LiveLaw.

Solicitor General at this juncture intervened to say that the Union Government has no objection to a Court-monitored investigation.

First thing is to build confidence: Senior Advocate Indira Jaising

Senior Advocate Indira Jaising emphasised that the women are still scarred and that it is crucial for them to be able to speak openly about their experience with others in whom they have confidence. She proposed that women who have prior experience assisting rioting victims of sexual assault be asked to speak with the victims.

“Victims of rape don’t talk about it. They don’t come out with their trauma. First thing is to build confidence. Today we don’t know that if the CBI starts investigation, women will come out. First there should be a High Powered Committee – with women from civil societies who have experience in dealing with survivors…”, she said, as reported by LiveLaw.

“How many times a rape victim has to be made to repeat her story? She has to tell it to the police, tell it to the CBI, it is an endless process”, she urged, highlighting the vicious cycle of trauma a survivor of sexual violence has to go through. 

She raised a demand for constituting a High Powered Committee, and suggested the names of Syeda Hameed, Uma Chakraborty, Roshni Goswami. She said that the above mentioned women have experience in dealing with such cases and have access to local communities there. She persuading the bench to constitute a committee of women who can interact with the victims. She suggested that this committee can then submit a report to the Court and based on that further decision can be taken.

While agreeing that the concerns raised by Ms. Jaising are “worthy of being considered”, CJI DY Chandrachud asked for her suggestions on how the process of arrest can fit in with the framework for investigation as per the CrPC. To this, Ms. Jaising replied that investigation has to be as per the CrPC, but the recording of the statements can be done by the high-powered committee. She also emphasised on ensuring that no evidence is lost during the investigation. 

SIT should look into the larger conspiracy about rapes in Manipur: senior advocate, Colin Gonsalves

Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves suggested the names of five retired DGPs that could form the SIT conducting the investigation in the said case. Gonsalves highlighted that the five DGPs named by him did not have any political connection. In his arguments, he also stressed that the officers should not be from Manipur. 

He also highlighted that the statements of the victims point out that they were with the police company before the crime happened. He alleged that the sexual crime was not an isolated event and that there was a “larger conspiracy” behind it involving police complicity.

“There is a conspiracy and it is directed by people who were not on spot. The SIT should look into not only immediate perpetrators but also the larger conspiracy about rapes in Manipur. They’re happening in a collective and coordinated fashion”, he said, as highlighted by LiveLaw.

Advocate Gonsalves also provided that there is a lack of confidence and trust associated with the investigation of the CBI as the Central Government had turned a blind eye to the plight of the people of the Manipur. 

“There is not much faith in CBI- the reason for that is that the Central government closed its eyes on Manipur. The people in Manipur, the victim, could not distinguish between State govt and Central govt- they acted in unison. Kindly consider not having CBI at all“, Gonsalves said, as reported by LiveLaw.

There has to be a SIT for confidence building: Advocate Shobha Gupta

Advocate Shobha Gupta, appearing for ‘We, the Women of India’, also submitted her suggestions to the bench. She also raised the demand for the constitution of an SIT to instil confidence in the people of Manipur to come forth with their complaints. Gupta has been the counsel for rape survivor Bilkees Bano (Gujarat, 2002).

Agreeing with Advocate Jaising’s recommendation to send a commission to meet with the victims, Gupta stated that the commission could obtain the first-hand accounts of the victims and survivors, under the auspices of the Supreme Court She further stated that the FIRs should be filed based on the testimonies of the committee so that the victims are free to avoid going to the police. 

“There has to be an SIT for confidence building measures. A team should be sent from here under aegis of SC- to meet and get victims’ first hand statements. On basis of that FIRs should be noted- we did in Delhi riots also. So victims don’t have to go to police,” she said, as reported by LiveLaw.

Ms. Gupta also emphasised on provided rehabilitation to the victims, alone with offering legal help through NALSA, and fast-tracking the trials.

She also pressed FIRs against police officers, and stated “I am pressing FIRs against police officers who were present- they actually lodged FIR saying 1000-1500 assailants had barged in village yet there was no one to protect them.”

Why would a woman come forward if the government doesn’t take any action? Advocate Vrinda Grover

Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for ‘Women in Governance India’, provided the Bench with more cases of Kuki women being targeted and subjected to sexual violence. She clarified that her clients have visited 163 relief camps, and she brings facts from the ground.

“Women in governance, which is a network of academics etc. have visited 163 relief camps so what I’ve mentioned are facts from ground,” Grover said, as reported by LiveLaw.

Ms. Grover informed the bench about an incident of two Kuki women being assaulted, tortured and killed in May. She further provided details regarding another incident of a gang rape of an 18 year old. 

“Two women were working at car wash in Imphal. A crowd come, tortured, murdered. Their bodies are lying in a morgue in Imphal. The families are in camps. The mother has lodged FIR, there is no one in govt who has come and said what fate of remains is. There is another girl- 18 year old, she was also gang raped. There was a zero FIR but that is where the matter stands. The matters halt at FIRs,” Grover said, as reported by LiveLaw.

Ms. Grover provided that in most of such cases, no action beyond the registration of FIR have taken places. Expressing anguished, she asked “Why would any woman tell if the police is not going to take any action?“

She emphasised that even as there are sexual crimes committed in many groups, “targeted sexual violence against Kuki women” is concerning. The Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, objected to the said submission, stating that he is against the naming of any particular community as it could lead to more violence.

In response to this, Grover said that the crimes’ targeted aspect could not be disregarded and cited Section 376(2)(g) of the IPC, which treats rape committed during communal strife as a separate offence.

“It is essential to highlight this targeted violence…the offence is also rape committed during communal strife…we cannot turn a blind eye towards it“, she said, as provided by LiveLaw. 

She pointed out that the FIRs only invoke Section 376 IPC, although the offence of gang rape is a standalone offence under Section 376D IPC. Grover also highlighted that atrocities against Scheduled Tribes are dealt with separately under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. 

“In these FIRs, SC/ST sections are not mentioned, neither are the atrocities mentioned. There is specific compensation in such cases,” as reported by LiveLaw.

With this, Ms. Grover furthered her plea for SIT monitored by this court, from outside the state. Highlighting the issue of ration, she further demanded that there should be an independent, impartial report on what is the status of relief camps.

These instances show police working against victims: Advocate Nizam Pasha 

Advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for Zomi Students Federation, informed the Bench that his application referred to fourteen instances of crimes against women, which show police complicity. 

“These instances show police working against victims- either not lodging FIRs or turning the victims to the mobs…there are acts of complicity by the police either by commission or omission“, Pasha said while urging that these instances also be transferred to the SIT, as reported by LiveLaw.

Mr. Pasha also made the following suggestions:

• One stop centres should be strengthened in Manipur by providing them with manpower and infrastructure. 
• Instead of jurisdictional magistrate, magistrate of whichever district victim located in should record statement under Section 164 of CrPC.
• Compensation must be given at the stage when 164 statement is recorded. 

The matter is expected to be now taken up after four days, not the four months that SG Tushar Mehta had requested.

Related:

Demands Unyielding: Opposition and Citizens persist in seeking PM Modi’s response on Manipur violence and Assam CM’s resignation

Behind the violence, grabbing Hill lands for palm oil manufacture: Manipur

Words of anguish resonate all-India, streets protests spill over, raising cries for justice: Manipur

Manipur Violence: Supreme Court warns union and state government to take action, or they will

Manipur Violence: Video showing 2 Kuki women being paraded naked opens the eyes of the government, PM Modi and Irani make first statements

“246 churches burnt in 2 day, somebody strong is playing games in Manipur”: Father Jacob G Palackappilly

Manipur violence: EU Parliament “denounces the nationalistic rhetoric deployed by leading members of the BJP party”

Manipur violence: SC provides interim protection in sedition case against lawyer who accompanied fact-finding team

Manipur Violence: SC bench seeks updated status report from State on rehabilitation, law & order situation

One in Manipur, another in Kashmir: Veterans slam two faces of Indian Army

Manipur is Burning but who cares?

Bishops of India must protest & speak out for peace, against injustices in Manipur & India: Jesuit priest

Denial of internet an assault on fundamental freedoms – a deep dive into Manipur’s incessant internet ban

Manipur women stage protest at Jantar Mantar to end violence in state

The Invisible Split: A report documenting reports of “ethnic cleansing” in Manipur, 2023

120 Churches destroyed, Christians insecure: Manipur

No Compensation Enough for Traumatised Kukis Fleeing Manipu

The post SC on Manipur violence: “What stood in the way of police registering the FIR immediately on May 4?” appeared first on SabrangIndia.