This Article is written by Pratibha Seth, third year B.A.LL.B. Student of Mahatma Gandhi kashi Vidhyapith, Varanasi. This article outlines the laws pertaining to mob lynching and suggests necessary amendments to address the aforementioned issue.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Impact of mob lynching in the country
Supreme Court on mob lynching
Punishments for lynching
Manav suraksha kanoon
Case studies on mob lynching
Recommendations
Conclusion
Rabindranath Tagore in his famous text, Gitanjali wrote these lines:
“Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way, into the dreary desert sand of Dead Habits into that world, My Father let my country awake”.
People no longer seem to be looking for answers; therefore, it appears that his request is now unanswered. In general, none of the mob-lynching episodes make sense.
Introduction
Mob lynching cases are on the rise annually, according to a report from India. A self-appointed body of persons enforcing the law without the authority of the law is what the Cambridge Dictionary defines as “vigilance.” Additionally, those who want to enforce the law without a legitimate reason are involved in lynching situations.
When someone is lynched, it is usually because a group of people accuse them of committing a crime, usually out of humor or religious prejudice. When one community’s opinions on a subject differ from those of another group, this occurs. Mob lynching is an illegal act that occurs as a result of this conflict. The majority of mob attacks in India that are related to cows are documented in states like Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Delhi, Gujarat, Karnataka, Rajasthan, and Madhya Pradesh.
While there is no official legislation in India prohibiting mob lynching, Subsection (a) of Section 223 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 / Section 246 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 which applies to two or more individuals, contains the relevant provision for charges to be brought against individuals jointly when they are accused of committing the same offense during the same transaction. People who are lynched in such cases receive appalling treatment. Inflicting severe injuries or even death, they are frequently hanged, whipped, and shackled.
Impact of mob lynching in the country
Notably, there has been a rise in the number of lynching-related instances. Attacks of this nature have become more frequent since the BJP government came to office in 2014. The rule of law and the fundamentals of natural justice are seriously threatened by this act of people taking the law into their own hands due to their limited understanding of the legal system. Minority groups in the nation have also been seriously threatened by these crimes, so proper action must be done to prevent and deter them.
In addition, there have been cases where vigilantes with political affiliations to right-wing groups have incited violence; these individuals think they are politically correct when they commit these crimes. These nationwide incidents of mob violence have frequently served to advance majoritarianism by stifling minorities’ fundamental rights and spreading the views of the majority.
People taking the law into their own hands is unacceptable in a society like India where citizens are guaranteed numerous fundamental rights, and lynching incidents violate those rights by violating people’s right to life, right to a fair trial, and other rights. Since India is a secular nation, it is crucial to make sure that the majority does not repress the minority’s interests.
Supreme Court on mob lynching
The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, Dipak Mishra, and the three-judge bench denounced the recent events involving mob lynchings and attacks on Dalits and other members of minority communities in Tehseen S. Ponawalla v. Union of India and Others. On July 17, 2018, he requested that the parliament draft and approve laws that would distinguish mob lynching as a distinct crime and specify the appropriate penalty, so serving as a disincentive to further lynching incidents.
The bench further argued that no person acting in their own right or on behalf of a specific group can interpret the law of the state in a way that requires them to impose punishment on someone they are not obligated to punish. Furthermore, the Chief Justice of India himself made reference to the necessity of giving orders for corrective, preventive, and punitive actions. The social activist filed a Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, and these actions are being carried out in compliance with that petition. He called for the required and expeditious action to stop the cow protection groups’ excessively violent mob lynchings. Even the removal of violent content submitted by the aforementioned groups to social media platforms was demanded in the petition.
Governments must take strong measures to avoid mob violence and mob vigilantism, and citizens should report any instances in which the mob breaks the law.
In the aforementioned instance, the Central government has petitioned the Indian Supreme Court to put the guidelines for the crime of mob violence into effect. Therefore, the entire Supreme Court bench has ordered certain actions to address this specific matter in compliance with the interim ruling. The following are the measures:
In each jurisdiction, the state government must choose a senior police officer who holds a rank equivalent to superintendent of police. Every district has to have a nodal officer assigned. In addition, a police officer holding the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police will support this officer in preventing mob violence inside the assigned district. The Supreme Court went so far as to propose that the preparation of reports for anyone suspected of committing such crimes or of disseminating hate speech, false information, or other provocative remarks be the responsibility of a Special Task Force.
Punishments for lynching
In our nation, there is no official legislation or legal provision that addresses lynching or mob violence in particular. Nonetheless, the current Indian Penal Code include the following laws, which establish the following penalties for mob lynching:
The Indian Penal Code, Section 302/ Section 103 (1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: This section addresses the penalties associated with murder. According to the statement, a murderer faces either life in jail or execution as punishment. In numerous instances, the convicted party can even face consequences.Indian Penal Code, Section 304/ Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: This section addresses the penalty for culpable homicide that does not qualify as murder. The following sanctions are possible:
-Life Imprisonment
In addition to a mandatory fine, the individual may receive a 10-year prison sentence for the crime they committed or may have caused an injury that resulted in a person’s death.
Section 325 of the Criminal Code of India/ Section 117(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, The penalty for intentionally causing great harm to another person is described in this specific section. Under the terms of this section, an individual who willfully causes great harm is likely to face up to seven years in jail as well as a fine, unless they are the result of provocation (as defined by section 335 of the IPC/Section 122 (2) of the BNS). Section 34 of the Criminal Code of India/ Section 3 (5) of the BNS: This section outlines the penalties for actions taken by multiple people with a shared goal. It says that when multiple people commit a crime with a shared goal, each of them has the same liability for the crime as if they had committed it alone. Section 120B of the Criminal Code of India/ Section 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, The penalties for individuals who are jointly involved in a criminal conspiracy are outlined in this section.
-Manav suraksha kanoon
The National Campaign Against Mob Lynching prepared a law in 2017. The Manav Suraksha Kanoon (MASUKA) law aims to initiate legal action against a group of individuals implicated in lynching. B.R. Ambedkar’s grandson, Prakash Ambedkar, and activist Tehseen Poonawalla have produced a bill to alter Article 21 of the Indian Constitution to allow for new legislation on mob violence. This bill stipulates that the area’s State House Officer (SHO) will be placed on leave until a deadline-driven legal investigation clears him of all charges. Additionally, this specific bill will aid in the rehabilitation of the victim’s family as well as in offering relief to the impacted parties.
Case studies on mob lynching
Anti-lynching laws have been implemented and enforced in India as a result of incidences of Lynching. It is regrettable that regulations against mob brutality do not fully prohibit mob lynching and that the crowd is not subject to any stringent obligations. As a result, victims of mob lynchings have not received justice. The case studies about mob lynching are as follows:
1- Dadri Lynching case took place in 2015 at Bisra Village, Uttar Pradesh. Because to community and regional divides, the individual was lynched. It was a man named Muhammad Akhlaq. He was charged with killing a cow so that its meat might be preserved for human consumption. The village’s Hindu population lynched the father and son as soon as they learned about this. In actuality, this story is regarded as one of the earliest instances of religious discrimination, with the victim being hanged in the cow’s honour.
2- In 2017, a lynching case happened in Delhi. It was predicated on the existing caste system, which required those from lower social strata or those who were backward to suffer. In this instance, a rickshaw driver stopped a few college students who were inebriated and spat on the public wall. The drunken students grew enraged and lynched the rickshaw driver. Case of mob lynching in Palghar: It is important to remember that a vengeful mob lynched a driver and two Sadhus on April 16, 2020. The Palghar district of Maharashtra has the village of Gadchinchale, where all of the victims were from. An unpleasant occurrence was sparked by a rumour that went viral on WhatsApp, claiming that thieves were active in the area during the coronavirus lockdown.
Investigations later revealed that the reason behind the vigilante mob lynchings was that the gang mistook the three robbers for one another, leading to their eventual deaths. In addition, the police officers who attempted to rescue these sadhus from such a watchful crowd also suffered serious injuries. In addition, a rumour circulated on WhatsApp following the incident with the intention of inflaming religious tensions. But according to the entire list of those detained, none of the vigilant attackers’ members identified as Muslims. Crucially, the Maharashtra state administration went on to clarify that the attackers and the victims shared the same faith.
Recommendations
Consideration must be given to a number of improvements concerning mob lynching incidents in India and around the world. In order to guarantee prompt justice, the Indian government must act.
• As an illustration, file a First Information Report (FIR) right away, quash any cases that could subject the weak and impoverished to more victimisation, and quash any bail requests that might put the victims and their families in grave danger due to the associated hate crime.
• Furthermore, programs like free legal aid should be included into the system to improve access to justice and establish a framework for determining the amount of compensation to be given to the victims or their families for the loss they endured.
• Furthermore, in order to guarantee that the victims of mob violence have received justice, the government should take the necessary actions to enact the law that the Manav Suraksha Kanoon (MaSuka) civil society has demanded. This law stipulates that laws pertaining to mob lynching must be non-bailable, cognizable, and non-compoundable, and that the offender must face life imprisonment in addition to a time-bound trial. In order to guarantee the safety of the witnesses, it is also necessary to take into account paying compensation to the victims’ families and taking police action. MaSuka must act in the same way for mob lynching victims as the SC/ST (Prevention from atrocities) Act, 1989 and the Protection of Women & Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which are intended to safeguard the interests of justice and protect the group.
Conclusion
One of the causes of mob violence was witch-hunting, which led to the lynching of 2000 mentally ill women on suspicion of kidnapping and murdering children. Events such as the 1984 Sikh riots, the anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat, or the lynching of Ghulam Muhammad by Hindu Yuva Mahaini due to his relationship with a Hindu girl in his neighbourhood have had a terrible effect on this country. To prevent these kinds of situations, persons who take it upon themselves to enforce the law and violate the rights of others due to a limited comprehension of justice need to be made aware of it.
Lynchings and vigilante attacks have grown commonplace in today’s world as a means of inflicting violence against minorities, particularly those who belong to underrepresented groups like Muslims. Lynchings and vigilante attacks are not the same as “communal riots.” These are incidents of mob violence committed mostly by individuals who, because of their limited knowledge of justice, believe they are in a position of power inside the state. Lynchings have allegedly occurred often, to the point where they have become a “national epidemic.”
Because of a case like this, Indians are learning to face justice with a great sense of dread that has culminated in a lurking, unidentified, unsaid fear. Because of its severe character, many now fear being attacked by mobs and feeling exposed in such circumstances.
Enhancing the legislation pertaining to mob lynching is another crucial role that the parliament can play. In order to address cases involving mob violence, the parliament should follow the directives provided by the Supreme Courts. This would entail drafting and passing a new law that would target the maximum punishment for both the lynchers and any officials involved in the mob lynchings, whether directly or indirectly. Furthermore, none of the current statutes define the word “mob lynching,” which needs to be defined in the new law.
It will be highly beneficial if a new, distinct legislation against mob lynching is passed and properly enforced. The state should understand, nonetheless, that the spirit embodied in the principle:
“You are too high, but the law is supreme over you.”
If the notion that “law is higher than everyone” is ingrained in people’s minds, it will prove to be the most effective weapon in the fight against the hate crime of mob lynching. Furthermore, the restoration of public confidence in the nation’s legal system is a prerequisite for its implantation.
The issue of mob lynching is no longer a minor one. To remove it, society as a whole must have the grit, courage, and gumption necessary. In order to effectively combat the ancient evil of mob lynching, the law should be used as a new weapon.
