A boy was ‘heard’ cheering Pakistan and his family lost everything. Is this justice?

medium nocaption118819983The events from February 23 onwards at Malvan, Maharashtra, are shocking but not surprising. As the narrative goes, Sachin Varadkar, a Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) member overheard a 15-year-old Muslim boy cheering Pakistan’s performance during the recent Champions Trophy match between India and Pakistan. Soon after, Varadkar allegedly gathered 50-60 men and attacked the boy’s house, beat him up and used strong words against the father. He then registered a complaint at the local police station against the boy and his family for raising “anti-national” slogans. This led to the arrest of the parents and detention of the boy. They were charged under the Bhartiya Nyay Samhita’s sections 196 (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion), 197 (assertions prejudicial to national integration) and 3(5) (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention). and others. The next day, February 24, the Sakal Hindu Samaj led a procession against the family. Later the same day, their house and shop were demolished by the Malvan Municipal Corporation. Though the police demanded custody of the parents, the local court granted them bail and the boy was handed over in his uncle’s custody.medium nocaption118829988Teen, parents held over India-Pak tie slogansmedium nocaption118829994What's worryingFour issues arise. First, how can the police act on the basis of a complaint of just one individual who claims he overheard someone. No evidence, no recording, no WhatsApp chat. This means any person can lodge an FIR against another which may be false or arising out of a mistake. Should the police not have made enquiries before lodging the FIR and making arrests?Second, assuming that the boy actually uttered the words, how does it amount to a penal offence? Across cricket-playing countries, Indian-origin persons who have settled in those countries often support the Indian team when they are playing against the host nation. Should these people be called anti-nationals? It is like an Indian movie is competing for an Oscar, but I may be rooting for a movie from another nation. Does it make me anti-national? Third, again, assuming that the boy made this statement, on what basis were the parents arrested? According to media reports, the remarks were made only by the boy. Even in respect of minors, vicarious liability does not ordinarily find a place in our law books. Fourth, how was their house and shop demolished without so much as a notice? This is in clear contempt of the order of the Supreme Court passed on November 13, 2024, which held, “The executive cannot demolish the houses or properties of individuals solely on the ground that they are accused of or convicted of a crime.” Several politicians have welcomed this move, essentially encouraging authorities to violate the order of the Supreme Court. Why is no action taken against such politicians? Besides, it is seen from videos that even a tempo belonging to the family was destroyed. This again is totally illegal and action should be taken against the corporation’s officers who ordered or participated in these actions. Same law, different treatmentAnd there is another hitch. In respect of hate speech, even if an FIR is lodged and the police believe that a charge-sheet needs to be filed, no cognizance can be taken unless the government grants sanction, which is rarely given if the speeches are against minority communities. Case in point: Recently, after a functionary of the BJP gave a speech virtually asking for killing Muslim children, an FIR was lodged. His speech had been recorded. The police took his voice sample, got it verified by the forensic laboratory and subsequently prepared a charge-sheet. But the State, in writing, without giving any reasons, refused to give sanction to prosecute. Does this mean that certain kinds of hate speeches have the approval of the government no matter how extreme they are? No arrest. No sanction to prosecute. The message that goes out is that on any minor issue or even non-issue, minorities can be attacked. The police, authorities and everyone concerned will protect the attackers. If you give a public call for killing Muslim children you will not be touched, but if inside your house you support a cricket team from Pakistan (of which there may not be any proof), you will be jailed, your house and business will be bulldozed, and at times you may even be lynched.One does not have much hope from the political establishment, the only hope is that the courts will take the Malvan incident seriously and ensure that such events do not recur. Of course, these issues see the light of the day due to active civil society and ultimately it is for the people of India to decide what kind of a country they want to live in. The environment in our country has been so vitiated that it appears that the only thing on which the government is functioning ‘efficiently’ is in targeting minority communities and encouraging the authorities as well as mobs to do so. The problem with 'love jihad'Recently, Maharashtra chief minister Devendra Fadnavis made a statement that a committee appointed to enquire into cases of ‘love jihad’ has received more than 1 lakh complaints. First, classifying all interfaith marriages as love jihad shows bias, and second, use of the phrase ‘love jihad’ in official documents is anti-constitutional. The phrase is not defined anywhere but its present day meaning seems to suggest that Muslim men want to marry Hindu girls in order to convert them and in the long run convert all Hindus. First, it denies agency to women. Second, it is highly patriarchal as when Hindu men marry Muslim women it is not treated as love jihad. Third, not all interfaith marriages lead to conversion. I know of so many interfaith marriages where the marriage is solemnized under the Special Marriage Act and neither party converts. Fourth, our Constitution permits willing conversion, and even the Supreme Court has put its stamp of approval on such conversions. The figure of one lakh complaints is obviously exaggerated unless thousands of people are complaining about the same couple. What would be interesting to see is how many women who have converted have actually complained. It is therefore necessary for the government to put all the details of the complaints in the public domain.