Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Sunday, November 24, 2024

Enact Strictest Punishment For Those Who Indulge In Communal Violence

Posted in: Criminal Law
Tue, Apr 19, 22, 20:22, 3 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 4887
the most terrifying scenes of fundamentalists brazenly and openly brandishing swords, attacking armless people with impunity, killing them mercilessly and firing fearlessly even on police personnel

Nothing on earth is most shocking, most disgusting and most horrifying than to witness the most terrifying scenes of fundamentalists brazenly and openly brandishing swords, attacking armless people with impunity, killing them mercilessly and firing fearlessly even on police personnel as we are presently seeing in different states! This begs the moot question: How can any civilized nation allow a few fundamentalists to behave like terrorists and openly attack women, children and even men in uniform without being made to pay a heavy price? Why should there not be the most strictest punishment for those who indulge in communal violence? Why should they be allowed to easily come out of jail?

Few more troubling questions also crop up like: How can Centre allow our national security to be mercilessly held to ransom by not taking the most strictest action against those who wantonly indulge in communal violence, arson and riots? Why should the property not be seized of those who indulge in communal violence? Why should the rioters not be deprived of all facilities available to an Indian citizen once their guilt is proved beyond doubt? Why should the rioters not be made to suffer themselves the most? If Centre and law enforcing agencies ensure this, will anyone ever dare to take law in their own hands and indulge in acts of riot, arson and communal violence most brazenly?

More to the point, it must also be asked: Why should rioters not be hanged or at least sentenced to life? Why should the property of rioters not be confiscated promptly without any discrimination of any kind on the basis of religion or any other ground? Why should all those who indulge in hate speech not be punished similarly? Why should India care for the human rights of those who are out to destroy the communal harmony of our nation?

It is high time and it must also be very rightly asked: Who are foreign countries like UK and US to lecture us on human rights? Why they never introspect on their own poor track record of violating human rights at the drop of a hat and invading even foreign countries like Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and making a complete mockery of even Pakistan as the former PM Imran Khan while in office was complaining with a very heavy heart and who also accused USA of meddling in its internal affairs? It must be mentioned here that India recently rightly asked USA to introspect on its own track record before lecturing India on human rights and also rightly expressed its own serious concern on human right violation taking place with impunity in USA!

Needless to say, the string of repeated communal violence incidents amidst religious processions in different States as we witnessed recently cannot be taken lightly under any circumstances. In Gujarat we saw how during Ram Navami processions communal clashes broke out between two communities in Himmatnagar and Khambhat cities. The members of the two communities hurled stones at each other when a Ram Navami procession reached Chhapariya locality in Himmatnagar city in the Sabarkantha district in late afternoon. A police official later told media that:
Police fired tear gas shells to control the situation. Later, the additional police force was brought in from outside the city to bring the situation under control.

Similarly we saw how a clash broke out during a Ram Navami procession in Khambhat town in the Anand district wherein stones were pelted and shops and vehicles were damaged by two groups. Due to this the police had to fire tear gas shells. How can India keep watching all this like a mute spectator?

We also saw how clashes were reported in at least two districts of Jharkhand during religious processions. The first incident happened in Hirdi village of Lohardaga district at around 5.30 pm. Arvind Kumar Lal who is Sub-Divisional Officer at Lohardaga said that CrPC Section 144 has been invoked and all religious gatherings and processions have been banned. But banning is no solution. Police must ensure that there is fool proof security during such processions and if anyone dares to indulge in violence on any ground then they must be promptly arrested and should not be given a lenient treatment at any cost and under any circumstances.

They must be kept in jail for at least five years so that a very loud and clear message goes out to one and all that no one can be allowed to take law for granted! Heavy penalty should be imposed on them and they should be made to realize that what crime they have committed by not giving them any respite! But this is what most unfortunately does not happen in India due to which criminals get complacent that they can get away even after committing the most horrendous crimes which is definitely most concerning and for this the police has to accept its culpability on its part for not acting swiftly, strictly and sensibly! The second incident was seen in Bermo area of Bokaro district during Ram Navami procession.

We similarly saw how curfew was imposed in three areas of Madhya Pradesh’s Khargone after there were reports of stone-pelting and arson during Ram Navami processions. Khargone District Collector Anugrah P said that Section 144 (banning assembly of four or more people) has been imposed in the entire city. Anugrah P also revealed that:
Curfew has been clamped in three areas including Talab Chowk and Tavdi in the city, adding that incidents of minor arson occurred following the pelting of stones.

At least two dozen people including the Superintendent of Police (SP) Siddharth Choudhary were injured. Additional Collector SS Mujalde said to NDTV news channel that:
When the Ram Navami procession started from the Talab Chowk area stones were allegedly pelted at the gathering, prompting the police to fire tear gas shells to control the situation. The procession was supposed to take a round of Khargone city but it was abandoned midway after the violence. Clashes were also reported from the adjoining Barwani district.

Reports of stone-pelting and clashes have also been reported from West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Uttarakhand. To top it all, even Delhi which is our national capital also did not remain safe. Clashes broke out between the two communities during a Hanuman Jayanti procession in North-West Delhi’s Jahangirpuri area on evening of April 16, 2022. It must be mentioned that several police personnel were also injured in the ensuing ugly violence. According to the police, stones were pelted and some vehicles were torched in the violence.

Without mincing any words, it must be said upfront: All those who indulge in violence whether they are Hindus or Muslims or Sikhs or Christians or belonging to any other religion must be all first identified after proper investigation and then they must be made to pay the price. There should be no bail for them. The trials in courts must take place at a war footing on the highest scale so that they are promptly punished and they don’t come out easily on bail only to further harm the victim and his/her family! Their Indian citizenship must be terminated and they should not be given any benefits which an Indian citizen is entitled to as what they have done resembles a lot with what terrorists do. So there must be zero tolerance for them! Even their property must be confiscated and they must be made to pay the price! Rights must be for those who believe in peace and not for those who believe in trampling others by brandishing swords and dangerous weapons!

No doubt, if this is done most strictly without any discrimination whatsoever on the ground of religion or on any other ground then certainly no one will ever dare to indulge in acts of communal violence! It is here that our penal laws need to be revised most thoroughly and amended accordingly. We all know fairly well that Centre is presently in the process of revising our penal laws. Whether it amends what all I have mentioned here is in the exclusive domain of Centre and so the ball is clearly in Centre’s court!

To conclude, it must be said that we who are just ordinary citizens of India have just no option to exercise but to keep our fingers completely crossed and watch everything just like a mere spectator as we have virtually no power to do anything in this regard! Let’s fervently hope that Centre acts most promptly on this and not just watch everything like a helpless and mute spectator! If Centre still fails to do anything most seriously on this score as we are seeing till now where rioters are able to escape easily then there is more to it than meets the eye and Centre is clearly culpable for not rising to the occasion and addressing this most serious menace root and branch so that it does not surface repeatedly as we saw most unfortunately in different States so shockingly!

It deserves to be asked: Why should they be spared who indulge in acts of terror by attacking people participating peacefully in any religious procession? Similarly if someone or a group of people who as participant in any religious procession raises provocative slogans and indulges in acts of violence without any provocation too must be made to face the long arms of law and punished most strictly! Of course, there should be just no discrimination of any kind in ensuring that the rioters are punished most strictly!

Only then will a loud and clear message go to one and all that riots, violence and killing would spoil their own entire life as also of their family! Also, those shameless and heartless politicians who give provocative hate speeches must be permanently debarred from contesting elections! It definitely merits no reiteration of any kind whatsoever that no one should be spared who indulges in spreading blind hatred and violence whether it is a leader or a lawyer or anyone else!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top