RRecently, a video went viral on social media in which a local-level politician from Madhya Pradesh, Pravesh Shukla, was seen urinating on a helpless, mentally challenged Dalit man. The disturbing video sent shockwaves across the nation, sparking widespread outrage and condemnation of the reprehensible and barbaric act.
The prompt response of Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan and the police in initiating strict legal action against the accused was widely appreciated. Well, Shukla was arrested by the MP police and charged under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, which were enacted to protect India’s socially oppressed communities. There were laws.
The incident is a poignant reminder of the deep and persistent prejudices and discrimination prevalent in our society, especially against people from historically marginalized castes, tribes and communities. It highlights the unfortunate reality of the atrocities faced by them in various parts of the country and the enduring curse of arrogance built up among certain sections of society, which fuels social division and hinders our social progress towards a more equitable and inclusive India. hinders. The fact that it was done by a political figure like Shukla, a BJP leader, added to the fireworks and controversy.
Was Chouhan’s ‘bulldozer action’ necessary?
However, what created controversy and raised questions was the latter’s demand for “bulldozer action” and invoking the National Security Act (NSA) against the accused. By now, many states in the country have normalized resorting to arbitrary actions, and if not curtailed, the bulldozer may become a symbol of their justice system. The demolition of a portion of Shukla’s house certainly sent a political message but undermined the principles of due process and rule of law. Besides, invoking the NSA against him seemed downright unfair. Under the law, the NSA is invoked only to prevent a person from attempting to undermine India’s security, defense and relations with foreign countries, maintaining public order or supplying essential supplies. While the actions of the accused were heinous and reprehensible, there does not seem to be any rationale for invoking the NSA in this particular case.
Whenever an offense is committed, it is the duty of the State to initiate the process of investigation and prosecution under appropriate sections of substantive and procedural law. Due process, right to fair trial and adherence to principles of justice will ensure that the accused are held accountable without compromising on the fundamental principles underpinning our constitutional and legal system. We must remember that the rule of law is the cornerstone of any civilized society, and any deviation from this principle, no matter how well intentioned, can lead to disorder and anarchy. The need of the hour is a balanced approach to law enforcement, which is not only prompt and decisive in its response to crime but also upholds the principles of justice and due process enshrined in the Indian Constitution. There is no room for theatricality and vigilantism in law enforcement.
Read also:
are not state surveillance organizations
Much has been written about the recent practice of speedy justice and bulldozer justice in some parts of India. Experts have questioned its legality and how it was done, often without notice or due process. Demolition, as a punitive action without following the law and procedures, is in violation of established constitutional norms and principles of criminal justice. These cases often ignore the principles of property rights, reasonableness and due process protected by the Constitution.
Apart from the frequent misuse of preventive detention laws like NSA, a common but illegal practice seen in many states is the act of ‘padding up’, whereby additional sections of the law are added at the time of registration of FIRs under unrelated heinous crimes. , in an attempt to artificially ‘strengthen’ the case. The other side of the same coin is the practice of downplaying the seriousness of crimes committed by influential people, when cases are deliberately registered under less serious sections of the law or charge sheets are filed. As a result, citing these grounds, the courts dismiss many such cases. It is important that our police avoid unnecessary theatrics to ensure objective investigation and fair delivery of justice.
The state is not a monitoring body. In the pursuit of justice, it is imperative for the State to always uphold the principles of due process and rule of law rather than resorting to dramatic punitive action. While it is important to bring criminals to justice promptly, it should not come at the cost of compromising the principles that govern our criminal justice system.
Prosecuting criminals under the appropriate sections of law ensures that justice is served while protecting the integrity and fairness of our judicial process. The state’s commitment to these principles is vital to maintaining social order and fostering trust in the legal system. Conversely, deviating from these principles, even when dealing with the most heinous crimes, undermines the integrity of the justice system, leading to miscarriages of justice, the conviction of innocents, or disproportionate punishment.
Upholding the rule of law not only builds public confidence in the justice system, but also ensures that punishment is meted out fairly and impartially while protecting the fundamental human rights of all individuals, including criminals.
N. Ramachandran is a retired IPS officer and the President of the Indian Police Foundation and Institute. Thoughts are personal.
(Edited by Zoya Bhatti)