Riding roughshod over rules and laws
COW vigilantes chased a car-borne youth on a national highway in Haryana for around 25 km, caught up with him and shot him dead. He happened to be Aryan Mishra, a forward-caste Hindu who obviously sensed that he was being followed but did not know why. He must have thought that the miscreants were robbers, and his first reaction would be to drive fast and escape. The vigilantes fired four bullets, two of which hit their target.
When the victim’s identity was established, the cow enthusiasts, whose sole interest is to punish Muslim butchers, beef-eaters and traders, were left with egg on their faces. The core of the BJP’s support base before 2014 came essentially from the forward castes. This case of ‘mistaken identity’ could turn many of the faithful against the vigilantes, if not against the party that spawned them.
Vigilantism is a double-edged weapon. It can frighten potential victims, but it can also turn these unofficially empowered ‘policemen’ into criminals! A parallel example can be found in the police establishment itself where the emergence of ‘encounter specialists’ has led to crimes being committed by men in uniform.
It is much more difficult to check criminals in uniform than it is to counter the underworld. An honest and determined police officer, respected by his own men and the public at large, can tame the ganglords. But ‘encounter specialists’, whose birth is the result of the failure of the criminal justice system, are decidedly more difficult to control.
‘Encounter specialists’ are drawn from the ranks of subordinate officers imbued with courage, initiative and a flair for leadership. They are accepted by the public as they dispense fast-track justice by assuming the roles of investigator, prosecutor and judge, all rolled into one. Public support translates into political support, and when the political establishment adopts them as the party’s saviours, it is well-nigh impossible for even enlightened police leaders to discourage them.
An identical principle applies to the cow vigilantes. They become a law unto themselves till a disaster like the ‘mistaken identity’ case occurs. Members of the Bajrang Dal are inducted into these vigilante groups as that is the most convenient source of recruitment for jobs that involve the use of muscle.
The Supreme Court recently took cognisance of this dangerous phenomenon. Poor Muslims, for whom the only source of protein is buffalo meat, are being serially subjected to vigilantism. The vigilantes barge into houses or stop vehicles if they suspect that beef is being stored or transported for sale or consumption. In states like Haryana, the police either close their eyes to these activities or support and encourage them.
Lumpen elements find a very exciting occupation in these vigilante enterprises, like in the case of rape-murder of a trainee doctor at RG Kar Hospital in Kolkata. The suspect was employed unofficially as a civilian volunteer and given free rein in the hospital. He even had access to the local police station and often used police motorcycles to go to work. In the examples quoted above, one factor is common. They have the sanction of those in power.
Besides fake encounters and cow vigilantism, the apex court recently took a serious note of ‘bulldozer justice’. Most municipalities keep bulldozers to demolish constructions built without official permission. Most municipal officers desist from using bulldozers for the purpose for which they were purchased. Illegal constructions are a dime a dozen in my city, Mumbai, but bulldozers have not been used to punish criminals to the extent that CM Yogi Adityanath has done in Uttar Pradesh.
When the agitation against the Agnipath recruitment reached a crescendo in Uttar Pradesh and public buses and other government property were destroyed in many cities of the state, Yogi did not order bulldozers to respond. He reserved that usage to deal with crimes, even petty ones, committed by Muslims. He forgets that the Constitution makes no differentiation on the basis of the creed, caste or economic status of the law-breakers. But in UP, Muslim boys falling in love with Hindu girls can expect the bulldozer at their doorstep.
Talking about ‘love jihad’, my Christian Communion, the Roman Catholic, used to refuse to solemnise marriages of Catholics with non-Catholics (including with Protestants, who are Christians) unless the non-Catholic partner converted to Roman Catholicism. That rule has been abandoned for the past six decades or more. And rightly so.
Islam, which is also an Abrahamic religion like Christianity, has not yet relented on this rule. If nikah has to be performed, the non-Muslim partner has to convert to Islam. If the parties to the marriage decide on a registered marriage, like the more educated and affluent do, the question of conversion does not arise. In that case, only ‘love’ remains — the jihad goes.
The accusation of a Muslim boy going out of his way to find a Hindu or Christian girl with the sole intention of augmenting the number of the faithful is ridiculous and outrageous. In a multi-religious and multi-caste society, as exists in all states of the Union, a few inter-religious or inter-caste marriages are bound to happen. Some young people of different religions or castes are going to be attracted to each other. It is time to accept that fact and bury ‘love jihad’, and dispense with laws to prevent or punish such marriages that Uttarakhand and some other BJP-ruled states have enacted or are in the process of enacting.
In my immediate family and also in the families of some friends who have experienced inter-religious union, there has not been a single instance of conversion. The phenomenon affects the poorer sections of society, which are surprisingly more conservative in such matters. It is surprising that accusations of ‘love jihad’ are made only in their cases. Perhaps the solution lies in ensuring better standards of living for all, which is what our Prime Minister has promised, but that is not going to happen anytime soon.
