Lucknow: It is unlikely that the Uttar Pradesh government would have expected the stern notification it received from the Lucknow court from the Allahabad high court on the Hathras gang rape case, which the Yogi Adityanath administration now appears to be attempting to distort and dilute.
Significantly, a court division court, consisting of Judges Rajan Roy and Jaspreet Singh, learned suo moto of the gruesome incident in which a 19-year-old Dalit woman was brutally traumatized and gang-raped, allegedly by four members of the community. Thakur of higher castes. men in a village in the Hathras district, some 175 km from the national capital, after which he died two weeks later in a Delhi hospital.
In its 11-page order, the court sought to remind the state government and its officials of their responsibility to the Indian constitution and their responsibility to the people, particularly those at the lowest rungs of society. It begins with the famous quote from Mahatma Gandhi in which he talks about ensuring the well-being of the common man.
Quoting a Hindi paragraph from Gandhi, the court stated: “This is a time to strengthen our determination to live up to the ideas that ‘Bapu’ represented, but unfortunately the basic realities are very different from the high values propagated and practiced by the Father of our Nation ”.
To convey their anguish and outrage over the incident, the judges said: “Today, we are compelled to take cognizance of an extremely sensitive and important matter that touches on the 2 basic fundamental / human rights of the citizens of this country and the residents of this country. State based on certain newspaper articles and programs shown in the audiovisual media, according to which, a 19-year-old girl, a resident of the District – Hathras in the State of UP was subjected to group rape and in this process not only her bones were broken, but also mutilated his tongue, presumably with the intention that he would not reveal the names of the authors of this heinous crime.
Calling her death “regrettable”, the court expressed its deep anguish at the way in which the woman was forcibly cremated by the police, which prevented her relatives from attending the funeral. The court noted how the cremation was carried out in the dead of night without even allowing the family to perform the last rites according to the prevailing Hindu customs “in a decent and dignified manner”.
“Newspaper reports and the electronic media / video clippings program show that family members continued to demand the body and also informed the authorities that according to the traditions followed by them, cremation cannot take place after sunset and before sunset. Dawn, however, the District The authorities made the cremation be carried out, contrary to the traditions that the family followed, ”the court said.
Quoting extensively from newspaper and television channel reports, the judges appeared to have compiled various aspects of the incident, including accounts given by the police and the district administration. How visual media reports refuted official claims was also explicitly explained in the order. “The incident has caused the displeasure of the general public as it is clear from the newspapers, television programs and has been condemned by all,” said the order, while adding, “incidents that occurred after the death of the victim on 29.09. .2020 before her cremation, as alleged, have shocked our conscience, therefore, we are becoming aware of the same thing ”.
The court called the hastily carried out cremation “a lack of respect for protocol and excessive on the part of the police.” He expressed surprise at the fact that “according to the media report, by the time the deceased victim’s body left the Safdarjung hospital in Delhi at 9:30 pm on Tuesday, the cremation took place at 200 km away in Hathras five hours later, between 2:30 am and 3 am on Wednesday morning. “
The judges have cited another journalistic report that mentions an official who acknowledged, on condition of anonymity, that “there were instructions to conclude the cremation at night to avoid a situation of” public order “in the morning.”
Taking note of another media report, the court wanted to point out that “it is said that the brother of the deceased victim said that when the ambulance transporting the girl’s body arrived in the village, her mother fell on her feet, the women of the family he yelled over the hood with clasped hands. Her mother pleaded with her to put haldi on her daughter’s body, but no one listened to her pleas. “
The order also took into account counterclaims made by the local police superintendent, the district magistrate and more particularly by the additional director general of state police (law and order), Prashant Kumar, who had been alleging that “cremation was it was done in the presence of family members and with their consent… The body was decomposing and that is why the relatives agreed that it would be better to incinerate it late at night ”. It has also been noted in the order how such claims were refuted by various members of the family.
Citing case law, the court said:
“We, in this sense, can refer to the decision of the Honorable Supreme Court reported in (1995) 3 SCC 248; Pt. Parmanand Katara vs. Union of Inida (UOI) and Others; where the Honorable Supreme Court had the opportunity to consider various facets of the right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He agreed with the petitioner’s argument that the right to dignity and fair treatment under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is not only available to a living man, but also to his body after his death. Being the legal position, the deceased victim after his death had the right to the last honorable, decent and dignified rites / cremation to be performed by his relatives in accordance with the customs and traditions followed by the family that according to the electronic media report He was a follower of the Sanatana / Hindu traditions, which, it is alleged, was not allowed. If this is found to be true, then it would be a case of flagrant violation of the basic and fundamental human rights enshrined in Article 21 and Article 25 of the Indian Constitution in the most flagrant and unjustified manner, something that is absolutely unacceptable. in our opinion. a country governed by the rule of law and the Constitution. “
The judges even cited Oscar Wilde to illustrate the meaning of dignity in death. “Death must be so beautiful. Lie down on the soft brown earth, with the grass on your head, and listen to the silence. Not having yesterday or tomorrow. Forget time, forget life, be at peace ”, they pointed out.
Resorting to similar subpoenas from other higher courts in the country, they added, “in light of the above, we are inclined to examine whether there has been a flagrant violation of the fundamental rights of the deceased victim. and the relatives of the victim; If state authorities have acted arbitrarily and illegally oppressively to violate such rights as if determined to be so, then this would be a case where responsibility will not only have to be set, but for future guidance. severe action would also be required. “
“The rights of individual citizens in the Country and in the State, especially those of the poor and the oppressed, such as the relatives of the deceased victim and the deceased herself, are paramount and the Courts of Justice have the inescapable duty to ensure that said The rights recognized by the Constitution are protected at all costs and the State does not transgress in its misguided effort for political or administrative reasons the limits of its powers to invade and violate such rights, especially in the case of the poor and the weak. We would like to examine whether the state authorities have taken advantage of the economic and social situation of the deceased’s family to oppress them and deprive them of their constitutional rights ”.
“We have also reflected on the atrocious crime committed against the deceased victim and although the State Government has established an SIT in this regard, we leave it open for our consideration at future dates, regarding the need to follow up on the investigation or obtain it was carried out through an independent agency under the law.
“The police officers stationed in the office of the Director General of Police, UP in Lucknow, having justified the cremation at night, have taken notice of the matter,” added the court.
Setting October 12 as the date for the hearing, the court has ordered the Additional Chief Secretary / Chief Secretary (Home), Director General of Police, UP Lucknow, Additional Director General, Law and Order, UP, District Magistrate, Hathras , Superintendent of Police, Hathras appear in court and present his version with the support of the necessary material. “They must also inform the court about the status of the investigation related to the crime against the deceased victim,” the order said.
While ordering the Hathras district judge to ensure the presence of the victim’s relatives during the hearing, the court has also asked the state authorities to provide all logistical support for her food, accommodation and accommodation during her stay in Lucknow. “The state authorities have the obligation to ensure that no one exerts coercion, influence or pressure on the relatives of the deceased in any way,” the judges emphasized.
In the meantime, they have also asked the court clerk to obtain all published material regarding the case from the journalists, who should be contacted to help the court with anything else they have in support of their reports.
By appointing lead attorney Jaideep Narain Mathur and attorney Abhinav Bhattacharya as amicus curie in the case, the court ordered the registrar to register the case as public interest litigation.
Sharat Pradhan is a journalist and author from Lucknow.
.
