Indian political history is peppered with instances of religious processions that led to communal strife, riots, inexcusable violence, arson, destruction of property and the tragic deaths of innocent residents of the riot-hit areas. This phenomenon has occurred regardless of the party in power and has much to do with the absence of professionalism and direct executive influence on the state police forces. 

Despite other factors as provocations, the failure of the police, administration and governments to regulate routes of such processions (religious) has been the single-most recurrent cause of such communal tension and violence. Even before independence this occurred, but since too, there appears to be a failure of institutional memory to implement steps for prevention.

The route then is the contentitious issue and the route then is what the police and administration — with dominant political groups and pressures—the state refuses to regulate.

The Indian Penal Code has recognised this. Enacted in 1860, Section 153 prescribed a punishment of six months imprisonment for wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot, and one year if the provocation resulted in rioting. Section 188, which made it an offence to disobey an order duly promulgated by a public servant, contained an illustration, which demonstrates at least one form of disobedience:

“S. 188. Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant.

Illustration: An order is promulgated by a public servant lawfully empowered to promulgate such order, directing that a religious procession shall not pass down a certain street. A knowingly disobeys the order, and thereby causes danger of riot. A has committed the offence defined in this section.”

Besides, a clear reading of the law as it stands demands adequate preventive action

The Preventive actions that need to be undertaken by the Police are detailed in Chapter XI of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CRPC) wherein Section 144 empowers a district magistrate, a sub-divisional magistrate, or any other executive magistrate empowered by the state government, to issue orders to prevent and address urgent cases of apprehended danger or nuisance. Sections 149 onwards are related to preventive action that a police officer is required to take to prevent the commission of cognisable offences. The petition enumerates only some of the legislative measures available to the law enforcement.

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) even contains definitions of offences under sections 295A and 296 relating to deliberate acts aimed at disturbing religious assembly. The Indian Arms Act (1959, amended in 2016) has strict guidelines precluding sale and transfer of arms (read in context of Trishul deeksha—distribution of tridents). Further, the Police Act, 1861 has provisions under section 30 for “regulation of public assemblies and processions and lice sing of the same”. The Police Acts of the respective states have similar outlined measures (including Gujarat and Delhi) and these have been modified and amended in the 1950s to date.

What has been our history post-Independence?

As has been studied and analysed by this author since 1992-1993, when Bombay burned post the demolition of the Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992, the violence that we have faced in in diverse parts of India, under different political regimes, and the vast majority of these have been caused by the deliberate choice of communally-sensitive routes by processionists, and the deliberate reluctance of the Police in dealing with such demands. Often this reluctance has in effect been collusion and connivance in licencing such routes.

A glance at some illustrative examples of such riots will make the point published in Sabrang Communications publishing of the Justice BN Srikrishna Commission report in 1998 with an Introduction by this writer will make the point. On ground coverage by this writer in the weeks following the violence revealed that, unlike what sections of the media made out, violence erupted in Bombay not with “angry Muslims demonstrating and rampaging the streets on December 7” but on the evening of December 6, 1992 itself when this writer recorded:

“But at 2.30 p.m. on December 6, 1992, the first communal incident that took place in Mumbai after the demolition of the mosque at Ayodhya was in Dharavi, where it was not angry Muslims but rampaging Shiv Sainiks led by Sena leaders Baburao Mane and Ramkrishna Keni who caused the first provocation. The local police allowed Shiv Sainiks to conduct a cycle rally of 200–300 persons. The rally passed through several communally–sensitive, Muslim–dominated areas in Dharavi and terminated at Kala Killa, where a meeting was held and addressed by the local activists of the Shiv Sena. Provocative speeches were made at this meeting. (Pgs. 7, 94 & 197)

“Besides, Dharavi was kept simmering by the local wings of both the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Shiv Sena through Ram Paduka Poojan Karyakrams and chowk sabhas between July and December 1992. Two Muslim organisations, the Tanzeem–Allah–o–Akbar and the Dalit–Muslim Suraksha Sangh, also organised meetings in the period of the run–up to the kar seva.

The police was a mute spectator. The state absent.

Lets go back even further.

Sholapur, 1967

The city of Sholapur in Maharashtra presents a curious picture of how certain religious processions have led, not unintendedly, to communal flare-ups, riots, and deaths. As found by the “Commission of Inquiry on Communal Disturbance at Sholapur – September 17, 1967”— chaired by Justice Raghubar Dayal, former judge of the Supreme Court, the Commission included Col. B.H. Zaidi, M.P., and retired bureaucrat Shri M.M. Philip — communal outbreaks had occurred on the occasions of ‘Rath Processions’ in 1925 and 1927, in connection with ‘Ganapati Immersion Processions’ in 1927 and 1966, and 18 cases of stabbing were spurred by the shouting of objectionable slogans during a procession by the Arya Samaj Satyagraha in 19391. Other mass stabbings took place in August, 1947, but those stemmed from the violence of Partition and the refugee crisis.

Bhiwandi, Jalgaon and Mahad, 1970

Bhiwandi, a powerloom centre barely 37 km from Mumbai, was the tragic site of large-scale communal disturbances and riots on May 7, 1970, which resulted in the loss of 78 lives, 59 Muslim, 17 Hindu, and two undetermined. As found by the “Commission of Inquiry to Inquire Into the Communal Disturbances at Bhiwandi, Jalgaon and Mahad in May 1970”, a one-man Inquiry by sitting Bombay High Court Judge, Justice D.P. Madon, these riots were the direct consequence of a massive Shiv Jayanti Procession comprising about 10,000 processionists armed with lathis, which insisted on a route which passed the Nizampura Jumma Mosque. The Bhiwandi riots led instantly to copycat riots on May 8, 1970 in Jalgaon and Mahad, two cities that had nothing in common with Bhiwandi; 43 died in Jalgaon, 42 Muslim and one Hindu; fortunately, no lives were lost in Mahad.

Justice Madon found that 1963 was an important year in the communal history of Bhiwandi, for that was when the Hindus started taking out processions which did not stop playing music while passing by a mosque. He found that 1964 was the year when the Shiv Jayanti Procession began its practice of stopping in front of mosques, shouting provocative and anti-Muslim slogans, and throwing excessive ‘gulal’. Coincidentally, this was also the year when the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, predecessor to the BJP, established its Bhiwandi branch. He found that these provocations were amplified in 1965, when for the very first time a procession other than a purely Muslim one went past the Nizampur Jumma Mosque.  Not surprisingly, the year 1967 witnessed the very first communal riots in Bhiwandi, which took place as the Shiv Jayanti Procession was passing by the Nizampura Jumma Mosque.

In 1969 the diverse, Shiv Jayanti Utsav Samiti was rendered defunct when 15 Jana Sangh members walked out, along with one Shiv Sena member and three of indeterminate political leanings, and formed the Rashtriya Utsav Mandal (R.U.M.), which set the stage for the 1970 processions. Justice Madon found that “the immediate or proximate cause of the Bhiwandi disturbances was the deliberate misbehaviour of the processionists in the Shiv Jayanti procession, which was taken out in Bhiwandi on May 7, 1970, in order to provoke the Muslims and the fact that at the instance and instigation the Rashtriya Utsav Mandal the majority of processionists, particularly the processionists from the villages, had participated in the procession carrying lathis to which Bhagwa flags and banners were tied in order to circumvent the ban under section 37(1) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, prohibiting the carrying of weapons, so that the processionists would be armed to meet the contingency of the Muslims starting any trouble either on their own or as a result of the deliberate provoking of the Muslims by the processionists”.

Jamshedpur, 1979

In 1978, the RSS/VHP insisted that the traditional Ram Navami procession should follow a new route that would pass through the congested Muslim area of Sabirnagar. Anticipating communal trouble, the authorities asked them to use a route that bypassed Sabirnagar, but the procession organisers persisted in their demand. They refused several alternate routes offered, even though Sabirnagar was not the most direct, nor was it an open or convenient route, as it involved a diversion through a kachha rasta and private fields to use that route. When the authorities did not give in, the RSS/VHP mounted a protest, holding the government to ransom, refusing to hold the procession for an entire year, to build up pressure on the administration.

Finally, the Karpuri Thakur-led Janata Party Government (a coalition ruling at the Centre and in Bihar State, with the BJP a prominent member in both) caved in, and in 1979 the local administration was persuaded to agree to allow the Ram Navami procession on a route through Sabirnagar. A “compromise” was arrived at, on the promise that the main procession would continue on the normal roads and highway, while a small “sample procession” would pass through Sabirnagar, accompanied by local Muslim elders, and would then rejoin the main procession on the highway.

When this “sample procession” was being escorted by Muslim elders and a small posse of the police into Sabirnagar however, a massive 15,000-strong main procession suddenly broke away from its licenced route and followed the “sample procession” through private fields into Sabirnagar, and once they reached the Sabirnagar Masjid, they were halted by BJP MLA Dinanath Pandey, who refused to allow the procession to move, and insisted that they had a right to remain there. He stood making incendiary anti-Muslim speeches.

Agitation and the inevitable stone-throwing ensued, followed by rioting and arson by the 15,000 processionists. This led to a widespread violence all over Jamshedpur, culminating in 108 deaths, 79 Muslim, 25 Hindu, and 4 unidentified. Widespread looting, destruction of property and arson accompanied the riots, and since the epicentre was Sabirnagar, the Muslims quite naturally suffered a disproportionate impact of the loss of lives and livelihoods.

A commission of enquiry headed by Justice Jitendra Narain, a retired judge of the Patna High Court, found the RSS and Dinanath Pandey primarily responsible.

Kota, 1989

For a city that had not seen any riots in 1947, nor in the five decades that followed, 1989 proved the potency of targeted processions in fomenting riots. On this occasion, and in this calm oasis of Rajasthan, it was the Anant Chaturdashi procession for the immersion of Lord Ganesh that was used to light the communal fires. On September 14, 1989 the procession was deliberately taken on a route through a congested Muslim mohalla, and halted in front of the largest Mosque, enabling the processionists to shout communal slogans and hurl abuses at the Muslims. Inevitably, this resulted in counter-slogans, and the confrontation then descended into stonethrowing and ultimately assaults with deadly weapons. By the time the day was done, 16 Muslims and 4 Hindus were dead, thousands of Muslim street vendors and traders had had their businesses torched, and widespread arson had destroyed homes and shops in the Muslim area.

The cause of this man-made disaster was pithily summed up by the one-man “Commission of Inquiry on Communal Riots in Kota in 1989”, consisting of sitting Rajasthan High Court Judge Shri S.N. Bhargava (he was Chief Justice of the Sikkim High Court when he submitted his Report):

“53. … … In all 20 persons died out of whom 16 were Muslims and 4 were Hindus. … … As is apparent from the evidence on record, the trouble started on account of shouting of objectionable and provocative slogans by the processionists reciprocated by the Muslim community. … … Taking an overall view of the evidence on record, I am of the view that it was the processionists who had started shouting objectionable and provocative slogans and it was only on account of the provocation by these objectionable slogans that the Muslim community also reciprocated the same.”

Bhagalpur, 1989

This time it was a Ramshila procession on 24th October, 1989 that was diverted from the licensed route and taken through the congested Muslim area known as Tatarpur. Ramshila processions were by their very nature provocative and triumphalist, as these processions carried bricks (shila) consecrated by priests over a holy fire, ostensibly to be used for the construction of a Ram Temple which was proposed to be built after the proposed destruction of the Babri Masjid at Ayodhya (the actual demolition of Babri Masjid was not to take place until three years later in 1992).

A commission of enquiry consisting of Justice Ram Nandan Prasad, Justice Ram Chandra Prasad Sinha, and Justice S. Shamsul Hasan, retired judges of the Patna High Court, found that though tension over Ramshila processions had already been building up in Bhagalpur for at least a year prior to 1989, yet the Administration and Police had turned a blind eye to it. The Commission noted that there was no application to route the 1989 procession through Tatarpur, and that the licence issued to the procession’s organisers did not mention Tatarpur (para 578).Yet the “mob consisting of thousands of miscreants” was permitted by the Police to deviate from the licenced route, enter Tatarpur, and wreak havoc against the defenseless Muslim populace.

“The Muslims of Bhagalpur and the surrounding areas were inflicted by divine wrath through marauding mobs in close alliance of the district police”, recorded the Commission in para 567 of its Report, and that this “is manifest by over 900 corpses with injuries and also over 900 individuals in handcuffs and manacles”. The Enquiry Commission found that “there were sufficient indications since more than a year before the commission of the riot…The District Administration as we have said, suffered from culpable amnesia, deliberate indifference and patent communal bias, incompetence in not anticipating the riot. Lack of impartiality in the District Administration also compounded the problem” (para 570).

This violence in Bhagalpur in 1989 cost a tragic 900 lives (Muslims), over three decades ago but as bad or worse is the legacy of state impunity in allowing “permissions” or “licenses” to such aggressive organisations   to pass through most congested and diverse areas. The fact that such practices result in escalated tensions around festivals, Hindu and Muslim, does not seem to affect governments. Since 2022, both Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti, falling as they did during the month of fasting for Muslims, Ramzan, these processions are allowed to carry exposed weapons and are accompanied by high-decibel concert-level music systems and DJs playing obnoxious and objectionable lyrics in front of mosques, all opening insulting to the minority community. Inevitably a provocation occurs, and violence results.

Today, from a lax complicity of the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s the State has turned active aggressor with the police in most part being either a mute spectator or weaponised itself through ideological bias.

Related:

Hindutva’s role in riots and official complicity

What was CJP’s PIL seeking directions for implementation of law for regulation of religious processions all about?

The post The contentious route, a common factor in inciting violence during religious processions in India appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It is the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its proxies and fellow travelers, such as the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), the Bajrang Dal, the Hindu Jagran Manch, and others have clearly played a direct and proximate role in all such states in spreading violence and stigmatizing and invisiblising the minority, states the report published by Chander Uday Singh, senior advocate in the Indian Supreme Court. The 178-page report released today has a foreword by Rohinton F Nariman former Justice in the Supreme Court and is an effort of the Citizens and Lawyers Initiative.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”— George Santayana

Closely examining the events like trishul dikhsa (trident distribution), armed processions around the “festival” of Ram Navmi and Navrati and Hanuman Jayanti, while also addressing the relatively new phenomenon of targeted administrative punishment of demolitions “pioneered” by BJP-ruled Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Madhya Pradesh (MP) and Delhi, the report addresses the sequence of events, response of state actors, demolition drives and media portrayal, providing a thorough documented analysis of the seemingly disparate but carefully orchestrated “events” of 2022.

Gujarat (Himmatnagar, Khambhat),  Jharkand, (Lohardaga, Kodermo, Bokharo), Madhya Pradesh (Khargone

and Sendhwa), Uttarakhand, Rajasthan, Maharashtra (Mankhurd Malad in Mumbai and Amravati), Goa, West Bengal are extensively covered as is the Jehangirpuri demolition of Delhi, the capital. States that saw low grade violence like Karnataka Bihar Andhra Pradesh and Telangana are also featured. The last chapter “Insights” examines the Nature of Institgation, Tactics of Mobilisaing minority, Administrative response as collective punishment.

A sinister pattern in marginalizing the civil and political rights of minorities, including right to residence and citizenship can be observed in the the multiplying of places of Muslim concentration in the form of ‘resettlement colonies’ on the peripheries of towns and villages, in the aftermath of the Gujarat 2002 riots was termed migration by the state,⁹²² observes the report.  “States Victims of the Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti violence, and the demolition drives that followed, face several layers of barriers to rehabilitation. It includes the loss of cash, documentation, and social support systems, threats to physical safety, and economic boycotts, but it is more than state apathy – in situations of communal violence, the Indian state has a history of disrupting Muslim families’ ability to rebuild and recover.

This is a precarity borne particularly by women, who bear the brunt of destabilizing the family and community. This is so visible post the violent religious processions as also in the ongoing citizenship, demolition crisis in Assam.

Distinct and Eerie Patterns

“There are distinct and eerie patterns amongst the Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti processions in April 2022 across all the States covered in this report. They all comprised of larger-than-usual gatherings of saffron-clad men drawing swords, waving trishuls and even (in some cases) firearms, taking deliberately mapped paths that crossed major mosques and Muslim-dominated neighbourhoods, and raising provocative slogans about the coming of a Hindu Rashtra, the conditions under which Muslims would be allowed to live in this Nation, and even justifying violence against Muslims. Many of these processions were accompanied by large flatbed trucks with concert-sized, high-decibel amplifiers and mega-speakers, on which DJs (disc jockeys) blasted hate-filled anti-Muslim music.

“While in some States such as in Goa or Maharashtra, the procession organisers appear to have been satisfied with mere intimidation of members of the minority community, in others – particularly in Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Jharkhand – they used the garb of religious festivities to openly target, attack, and even destroy Muslim shops, handcarts, businesses, livelihoods, and even homes. States that saw the most violence are also those where Hindutva groups and extremists enjoy the highest levels of political patronage. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its proxies and fellow travelers, such as the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), the Bajrang Dal, the Hindu Jagran Manch, and others have clearly played a direct and proximate role in all such states in spreading communal unrest.⁹⁰⁴

Fear Psychosis & Propaganda: Hindu Khatre Mein Hai

“Simultaneously, in continuity with the treatment given to other recent events of communal violence that disproportionately targeted and affected the Muslim community, the events of April 2022 have also been instrumentalised to lend credibility to the notion of “Hindu khatre mein hai” (Hindus are in danger). Therefore, it is important to document the seemingly coordinated nature of the provocation and abuse, the one-sided media portrayal of the genesis of the violence, and the erasures of losses incurred at the hands of both mob violence and the brutality of the State’s response.

The Media Echo Chamber of Propaganda

“Mainstream media, politicians and commentators from the Hindu Right kept up a stream of invective suggesting that the widespread, pan-India violence in April 2022 was instigated by Muslim communities that threw stones at the processions without provocation. It is clear that news media, and particularly the mainstream television channels, played a leading role in

⁹⁰⁴ Anwar T. (13 April 2022). Ram Navami Violence: Institutionalised bid to subvert democracy. NewsClick. Retrieved from https://www.newsclick.in/Ram-Navami-Violence-Institutionalised-Bid-Subvert-Democracy-Mobsters- Pave-Way-Hindu-Rashtra [09 July 2022]manufacturing fear amongst the Hindu majority, helping to galvanise public opinion against minority communities.

has lyrics that translate to ““We are hardcore Hindus, we will create a new history / We will enter the homes of enemies, and will cut their heads […] / In every home the saffron flag will be seen, the rule of Ram will return / There is only one slogan, one name, victory to lord Ram, victory to lord Ram.”⁹⁰⁷

“In some areas, this might suggest that caste-based polarisation is being replaced by a religion- based one, by appealing to all caste groups to identify themselves as superior to non-Hindus, especially Muslims. A ground report from Jharkhand about the Ram Navami violence of 2022 states that “A section of Dalits already seem to have traded their Constitutional right to equality with feeling of superiority and power over the Muslims, but subject themselves to the traditional authority of those above them in the Hindu caste hierarchy. They control no resources save the feeling of authority over the Muslims.”⁹¹¹ In Delhi’s Jahangirpuri, the Hindutva cause represents a path to social mobility for younger generations among the lower-caste Bengali Hindus, a way to assert their credentials as part of a pan-Hindu identity against a common enemy: Muslims.⁹¹² Reports from Khargone in Madhya Pradesh reflect similar patterns and motivations. The Sakal Hindu Samaj, a collective created in 2021 to bring various caste groups under its fold to address issues concerning Hindus in Khargone, has tried to find ways to enforce the economic boycott of Muslim businesses in the district’s villages.⁹¹³

further such drives.⁹¹⁷ Calls for mass violence against Muslims in general have been taking place, with tacit endorsement from the authorities, in the form of Dharma Sansads and Hindu Mahapanchayats in Delhi, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, and Haryana.⁹¹⁸

“Widely recognised by lawyers, human rights defenders and experts to be arbitrary and unconstitutional, the demolition drives break the three cardinal principles of the Indian Constitution, i.e., presumption of innocence, rule of law, and separation of powers between the three wings of the government.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, more than a hundred retired senior civil servants stated that the administration of law has become the means by which the minorities, particularly the Muslim community, can be kept in a state of perpetual fear.⁹²⁴ Facilitation and support for communal frenzy is being provided at all levels of the administration – from local police and administrative officials to the highest political levels in state and central governments. The letter states, “While the actual commission of violence may be outsourced to fringe groups, there is little doubt as to how the ground for their operations is made fertile, how each of them follows a master script and shares a common ‘tool kit’ and how the propaganda machinery of a party as well as the state is made available to them to defend their actions.”⁹²⁵

The entire report may be read here.

Related:

Violence breaks out after controversial route of a procession passes Mosque in Karnataka’s Haveri, 15 detained

CJP’s PIL seeking directions for established law & procedure on religious processions: A Factsheet

The post Weaponsing religious processions, demolishing minority homes, a nadir in breakdown of rule of law: Report appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On Friday, December 9, the Supreme Court (Justices Chandrachud and Narasimham) dismissed CJP’s PIL on this issue. The dismissal has received wide media coverage. As an organiaation committed to espousing all issues that seek to deepen India’s accountability mechanisms especially when related to protection of life and property, CJP offers its readers details of the petition that — in the light of violence reported across states during Ram Navami 2022, relied on statutory provisions of law, judicial commission reports & countless judgements of the courts.

The PIL filed by CJP in May 2022, soon after the countrywide Shobha Yatra violence in several cities,  had relied upon an MHA 2019 advisory, a 2019 Punjab Police Detailed Directive, Statutory provisions of Indian criminal law and the State Police Acts, detailed recommendations of Commissions headed by former judges of Supreme Court and High Courts, and a slew of judgements of the Supreme Courts; and had sought their urgent and consistent implementation. The SC, at the first hearing of this PIL on December 9, clearly held that, state being a law and order subject, there was no need for the SC to intervene in the matter. Besides, the court enjoined the petitioners to look at how a majority of religious processions, like the Ganpati processions in Maharashtra which involve hundreds of thousands of processionists, pass off peacefully each year. The PIL in fact emphasized those processions that were allowed to take place violating established norms like routes and worse, allowed those in the procession to brandish arms.

The PIL: Fact Sheet

In the background of the several instances of violence witnessed in various parts of the country during Ram Navami in April this year, innocents were targeted, life and property destroyed. Worse, communal harmony was seriously disturbed. To curb and control such outbreaks, concrete and strict adherence to well-laid down laws and procedures must be followed by the state law enforcement machinery.

To maintain law and order and to abide by principles of secularism laid down in the Indian Constitution, where all Indians are equal before the law and entitled to protection against violence, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) has approached the Supreme Court to issue detailed guidelines and lay down a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) on the route to be allowed/followed by procession-ists and the fact that Indian law requires them not to be armed.

In essence, this petition seeks appropriate directions to the Union and all States for observing statutory provisions of law and following recommendations of Commissions of Inquiry that have dealt with regulation of mass processions in the past. The petition especially highlights the report of the ‘Justice DP Madon Commission of Inquiry’ which had in much detail provided such guidelines about how to deal with a potentially dangerous procession in order to prevent a law and order situation. It also seeks an SOP from the Centre for regulation of religious processions to ensure that all faiths are treated equally and no disturbances are caused to the public at large.

MHA and Punjab Police Guidelines

In January 2019 and 2018 respectively, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) issued a detailed advisory on “curbing the illegal use of arms and firearms” as being violative of the Indian Arms Act (1959 as amended in 2016). This advisory clearly states that,

“It is once again requested to ensure that strict legal actions are taken, as per the provisions contained in the Arms Act, 1959, the Arms Rules, 2016 and other relevant provisions of IPC and Cr.PC, against the person(s) indulged in the illegal practices of celebratory firing in marriages, public gatherings, religious places / processions, parties, political rallies etc. so as to curb such incidences. Further, licenses of such perpetrators or any licenses who violates the provisions of Arms Act, 1959, the Arms Rules, 2016, to be cancelled in accordance with the law”

Punjab Police Guidelines of 2018

In 2018, the Punjab Police issued Guidelines/advisory “for regulating organisation and conduct of

processions / assemblies / protests / demonstrations / dharnas / marches etc.” These too lay down 19 clear instructions on what jurisdictional police officers need to do to deal with processions of all hues and prevent them turning unruly and violent. Apart from a legal prohibition against carrying of arms and lathis, the Guidelines also re-emphasise that the entire processions need to be video graphed and organisers need to give undertakings to ensure lawful behavior and conduct. Significantly, the organsiers are required to ensure that “no inflammatory speech or any unlawful activity is done at the venue of procession or assembly, which may cause tension in the area or create mutual hatred or create differences amongst different communities, castes, groups, religions etc.” 

As is clear from the narrative of several such incidents that broke out in April 2022, all these pre-conditions were followed in the breach. Incidents took place in Delhi, UP, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Karnataka, Jharkand, West Bengal and Maharashtra.

Violence during Ram Navami

Narrating the series of incidents in April 2022, the petition highlights that religious processions carried out during Chaitya Navratri, Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti in April were marred with clashes, stone pelting as well as trishul (trident) distribution which led to violent confrontations in Gujarat, Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and West Bengal.

In Rajasthan’s Karauli, stones were allegedly pelted at Ram Navami processions while it was passing by a mosque which led to altercation whereby 15-20 persons were injured, and shops and vehicles were burnt.

In Jaipur, a Ram Navami processions passed through the old city despite section 144 of CrPC being imposed. In Khargone, Madhya Pradesh, the Rama Navami procession clashed with the namaz time (evening prayers). It is highlighted that Hafiz Mohsin, the secretary of the Jama Masjid in Talab Chowk area were alerted about it being a sensitive zone and yet permissions were granted for the procession. The procession that caused violence was carrying posters of controversial film “Kashmir Files” with slogans of “Jaago Hindu Jaago” (wake up Hindus). Within 2 days of the incident, over 32 shops and 16 homes belonging to Muslims were demolished, suggest news reports.

Moreover, such instances of violence were also reported in Gujarat, Jharkhand, Delhi, West Bengal, Karnataka as well as Bihar.

The petition highlights that secularism is a positive concept that envisages that the State should have equal respect for all religions and refrain from discriminating between religions. It further states that principles of equality and equality before law (Article 14), non-discrimination (Articles 15,16,17), freedom of expression, faith, belief and worship (Articles 19, 25-30) are non-negotiable and need to be upheld when it comes to matters of public expressions of faith and culture.

It is these principles of governance that have resulted in the body of constitutional governance, criminal laws, police acts, jurisprudence and proceedings of judicial commission reports. The petition’s main point of contention is that crucial findings and recommendations of several Commissions of Inquiry about permissions of such religious processions and monitoring of their conduct etc have been ignored.

The Law as it stands

The Preventive actions that need to be undertaken by the Police are detailed in Chapter XI of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CRPC) wherein Section 144 empowers a district magistrate, a sub-divisional magistrate, or any other executive magistrate empowered by the state government, to issue orders to prevent and address urgent cases of apprehended danger or nuisance. Sections 149 onwards are related to preventive action that a police officer is required to take to prevent the commission of cognisable offences. The petition enumerates only some of the legislative measures available to the law enforcement.

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) even contains definitions of offences under sections 295A and 296 relating to deliberate acts aimed at disturbing religious assembly. The Indian Arms Act (1959, amended in 2016) has strict guidelines precluding sale and transfer of arms (read in context of Trishul deeksha—distribution of tridents). Further, the Police Act, 1861 has provisions under section 30 for “regulation of public assemblies and processions and lice sing of the same”. The Police Acts of the respective states have similar outlined measures (including Gujarat and Delhi) and these have been modified and amended in the 1950s to date.

Jurisprudence

In Praveen Togadia v. State of Karnataka (2004) 4 SCC 684, the Supreme Court had upheld administrative order to prevent a potentially harmful gathering that could have turned violent. Telangana High Court while dealing with grant of permission for Ram Navami processions this year, stressed that conditions imposed by the Police should be strictly followed and restrained independent processions.

Commissions of Inquiry reports and guidelines

After Maharashtra saw communal violence in 1970, Justice DP Madon Commission was established which, among others, gave the following recommendations:

106.7 Processions likely to provoke trouble stand on a special footing. Before granting permission to the organizers to take out such a procession and before prescribing a route for it under section 36 of the Bombay police Act, the officer concerned should undertake a thorough   reconnaissance of the proposed route, note the bottle–necks, the likely points at which there may be danger to the procession by reason of an attack from rival groups and the places where there may be danger from the procession itself by reason of the procession-ists attacking the inhabitants, shops or houses of that locality, and should ascertain the places where escape routes are available and where the procession can be stopped and dispersed when it becomes unruly.

The recommendations also state that each procession must be divided in sectors and a police officer should be put in charge of each section. Further it states that mammoth processions should never be permitted to march through the streets even if peaceful and that police parties should be at the “head and tail” pf each processions of controversial nature.

Apart from direct law and order issues, Justice Madon had emphasised the communal mindset derived from the [perversions of religion and the distortions of history.

When the Bombay riots of 1992-93 occurred, Justice BN Srikrishna Commission report (February 1998) referred to institutional failure behind the state government’s implementation of the Madon Commission’s recommendations. The Madon Commission Report and at least two dozen others are the ones that the petitioners rely on to make their arguments. These judicial commission reports have pinned responsibility on the failure to regulate certain outfits as being responsible for outbreak of violence.

Government guidelines

The petition also points towards the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) guidelines of 1997 titled “Guidelines to promote communal harmony” which specify the responsibility of the state machinery while dealing with potentially inflammatory statements in the context of communal tension.

Questions that need to be asked

The petition states that the court needs to examine the incidents of violence and pose and consider the following questions:

1.       Who granted permission for their possessions?

2.       Was permission granted at all?

3.       Who allowed/granted permission for arms to be carried in this procession?

4.       Was or has penal action been initiated following the outbreaks?

5.       Who has permitted trishul diksha when intimidatory remarks threatening to exterminate an entire community of Indians have been made?

6.       Has there been any lawful prosecution and prevention of such blatant arms distribution assemblies?

7.       Has there been any action against police officers or members of the administration for failure to perform their lawful and statutory duties?

The petition avers that had the recommendation of Commissions like the Madon Commission and the BN Srikrishna Commission been followed, these incidents could have been avoided.

The petition states,

“The rule of law was and is the greatest casualty following functioning Indian democracy from within. This is despite the fact that judicial commissions have identified this as one of the major causes behind the generation of communal atmosphere within which the outbreak of violence happens. This ambivalence on action against speeches that are motivated with a desire to spread animosity and violence against the particular community is often linked to the widespread acceptance of majoritarian communalism in the first instance by not just the police but even the public prosecutor and other sections of the law and order machinery”

While referring to the United Kingdom’s Hate Crimes Manual, the petitioners urge that “similar institutional measures for internal self-correction within institutions of law and order machinery and governance could ensure that the constitutional mandate of equality and non-discrimination manifests itself within their functioning.”

The petition highlights that in order to deal with communal disturbance, “a candid acknowledgement and acceptance of the phenomenon of communalism the role of history and its manipulation and the overarching tendency of all political structures” is required.

Pleadings

The petitioner had urged the Supreme Court to give the following directions:

1.       That, all processions should be regulated as per law and settled jurisprudence on the routes to be followed precautions taken and more specifically not be allowed to pass through areas of other religious denominations at sensitive times that conflict with diverse religious observances of different faith

2.       That, all religious possessions should be conducted in accordance with the permissions granted

3.       That, the executive must perform their statutory duties and regulate monitor and control the routes of such processions ensuring that these are unarmed

4.       That, while granting permission to such processions the competent authority must place public safety, public order, cleanliness and protection of environment, adequacy of arrangements for handling emergency superior to the conduct of the procession.

5.       That, the government must develop an SOP for granting permission for taking out a religious procession and this needs to be overseen by the Supreme Court.

Related:

CJP FILES A PETITION FOR LEGAL AID TO NRC EXCLUDED PERSONS IN ASSAM

CJP’S LOVE JIHAD PETITION: SC ISSUES NOTICE TO UP AND UTTARAKHAND

CJP PETITIONS NHRC OVER COMMUNAL CLASHES IN MADHYA PRADESH

CJP MOVES SC TO INCLUDE MP, HP IN ITS ‘LOVE JIHAD’ PETITION

The post CJP’s PIL seeking directions for established law & procedure on religious processions: A Factsheet appeared first on SabrangIndia.