The Sajjan Kumar verdict promises to form the basis for an evolving Indian law of accountability in cases of mass violence

Indian Express, January 4, 2019

A judgment, a foundation
The Sajjan Kumar verdict promises to form the basis for an evolving Indian law of accountability in cases of mass violence.

Written by Balakrishnan Rajagopal

The verdict of the Delhi High Court in the Sajjan Kumar case has been welcomed by most commentators. What has not been sufficiently appreciated is that one of the main lessons we must take from the verdict is that the need is stronger than ever for a root-and-branch police reform.

Indeed, some parts of the “administration of justice” are so rotten now, or are caught up in impossible imbroglios like the CBI, that strong political leadership is needed for a bold and visionary approach to reform. Although the problem is well known, no leading political party or mass movement has managed to focus attention on police reform. As the Delhi High Court points out, there were multiple failures in the administration of justice after the 1984 violence, starting with the repeated failure to file FIRs, abetment of the crimes committed by the mobs and failure to prosecute or gather material evidence.

As highlighted by the Court, there is also the key issue of the lack of a credible witness protection programme in India, which hampers the willingness of witnesses to come forward or to maintain consistency. Many cases arising from the Gujarat violence of 2002 have had serious trouble maintaining a credible and consistent witness line up due to fear, intimidation, and retaliation, most notoriously in the Best Bakery case where 37 of the 73 key witnesses including Zahira Sheikh, her mother and her brothers retracted their statements before the judges.

One of the most important innovations of the Sajjan Kumar verdict is the reliance on the crime of criminal conspiracy under Section 120B of the IPC to convict Sajjan Kumar, and also expand the conviction of the other accused. To my knowledge, this the first time that an appellate court in India has relied on the charge of criminal conspiracy to convict individuals for mass crimes.

While the Naroda Patiya judgment of the Special Court in 2009, which convicted Maya Kodnani among others, also relied on criminal conspiracy, the Delhi High Court has firmly entrenched the use of criminal conspiracy as an independent crime against those who are accused of mass crimes. The significance of the Delhi High Court ruling on this matter goes beyond this single case and sows the seeds of an Indian law on mass crimes, which is more aligned with an Anglo-Saxon approach.

Under international criminal law, the question of whether criminal conspiracy can be treated separately as a crime — as distinct from genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes — has led to some divisions, especially between civil law and common law countries. These divisions led in the end to the removal of a separate conspiracy provision in the Rome Charter of the International Criminal Court, for example. However, the Delhi High Court’s use of criminal conspiracy is certainly an innovative approach on a solid legal footing, sharing much in common with other common law countries.

The Delhi High Court’s verdict is also notable for its open call for a new law on “Crime against humanity”, and does much to point out the recent developments under international law including ongoing work at the International Law Commission. While this call is a highly welcome one, it must be noted that nothing prevents Indian courts and prosecutors from levelling charges against those who commit mass crimes under ordinary criminal law including the IPC, using charges of criminal conspiracy and abetment, as the court does in the Sajjan Kumar verdict. India has been a party since 1968 to the convention on the non-applicability of statutory limitations to war crimes and crimes against humanity, while India extends universal jurisdiction (over crimes committed by anyone anywhere globally) over war crimes under the Geneva Conventions Act of 1960.

Taking the cue from the Delhi High Court ruling and these legal commitments, India’s Law Commission, legal advocates, social movements and lawmakers should make appropriate changes to the IPC, incorporating the criminalisation of mass crimes including genocide, crime against humanity and the legal principle of non-applicability of statutory limitations under the 1968 Convention.

It is rare that a single case can accomplish so much: The Sajjan Kumar verdict promises to be a locus classicus in an evolving Indian law of accountability. But even this victory cannot blind us to the fact that most of the guilty, including the ones at the top, remain free. If we take the Gujarat riots in 2002, while six out of the nine cases relating to that violence have resulted in convictions, it is hard to escape the conclusion that the most guilty have escaped punishment thus far. But the Sajjan Kumar verdict gives us hope that, as Martin Luther King said, while the arc of the moral universe is long, it bends towards justice.


The writer is associate professor of law and development at the department of urban studies and planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.

India - 1984 Riots: Sajjan Kumar’s conviction | Editorial, The Hindu

The Hindu, December 18, 2018

Editorial
The shadow of 1984: Sajjan Kumar’s conviction

Sajjan Kumar’s conviction reignites hope of substantial justice for riot victims

https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/the-shadow-of-1984-sajjan-kumars-conviction/article25766413.ece

India: Two convicted for 1984 anti-sikh killings in Delhi

The Times of India

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/66627391.cms

India: Educational Aspirations of Survivors of the 1984 Anti-Sikh Violence in Delhi | Yamini Agarwal

Contemporary Education Dialogue, Vol 14, Issue 2, 2017, page(s): 166-186
Educational Aspirations of Survivors of the 1984 Anti-Sikh Violence in Delhi
Abstract
Violent conflicts are becoming a regular feature across the world. Studies have pointed to the impact they have on the education of young survivors. But education appears in these studies as an instrument of integration. They overlook the processes both within and outside schools that affect the educational lives of young survivors. This article examines the educational trajectories of seven survivors of the 1984 anti-Sikh violence, looking beyond the narrow focus on increasing access to schools post-violence. It argues that the consequences of violent conflict on education of children who are directly affected are long-drawn and complex and need to be examined keeping in mind the agency of families and role of schools.

Author:
Yamini Agarwal1
PhD Scholar, Zakir Husain Centre for Educational Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

https://doi.org/10.1177/0973184917716994

India: Pogroms and politics - Nellie, Delhi, Bombay and Gujarat are dots on a learning curve

The Telegraph, November 5, 2017

Pogroms and politics
- Nellie, Delhi, Bombay and Gujarat are dots on a learning curve
Mukul Kesavan

Pogroms in republican India don't hurt the parties that organize them. They help their cause. The Congress won the largest mandate in India's electoral history after Congressmen helped murder thousands of Sikhs in Delhi in 1984. Forty nine per cent of the vote. Four hundred and four seats. This wasn't the accidental outcome of a tragedy; the Congress milked the pogrom in its election campaign. The Rediffusion advertisements that Rajiv Gandhi ran asked potential voters to vote for the Congress if their taxi driver made them nervous. Why? Because Sikhs were often taxi drivers and the Congress, as the pogrom demonstrated, had a way with Sikhs. Congressmen accused of leading or organizing the violence remained members of parliament, ministers and senior party functionaries for decades after the pogrom.

The previous year, in February 1983, at least 2,000 Bengali Muslims were killed in Nellie in Assam. The All Assam Students Union that led the massive agitation against the enrolment of illegal Bangladeshi migrants into Assam's voter rolls before the Nellie massacre did very well out of its mobilization and the bloody aftermath. It turned itself into a political party, the Asom Gana Parishad, and handily won the state assembly elections of 1985. Prafulla Kumar Mahanta served two terms as the chief minister of Assam. No one was tried or sentenced for the 2,191 people killed (the official death toll, the unofficial estimates are several times higher); all the cases were dropped after the Assam Accord was signed. The Tiwari Commission report into the massacre was never made public.

The Bombay 'riots' of December 1992 and January 1993 were, in fact, an ongoing pogrom in the wake of the Babri Masjid demolition. At least 900 people were killed. The Shiv Sena's role in inciting anti-Muslim mobs and organizing violence was reported by journalists and criticized in the report written by Justice B.N. Srikrishna. But Shiv Sena politicians and complicit policemen didn't serve time for their role in the violence. The Srikrishna report was shelved and the Shiv Sena reaped a rich political harvest soon after. In the 1995 assembly elections that followed the violence (the pogrom and the subsequent terrorist bombings organized by Muslim ganglords like Dawood Ibrahim), the Shiv Sena formed the government of Maharashtra as the senior partner in a coalition with the Bharatiya Janata Party.

The Gujarat pogrom of 2002 was initially seen by A.B. Vajpayee and some of his colleagues as politically unacceptable, but it came to be viewed as Narendra Modi's national calling card. The criticism he received for the Gujarat government's alleged complicity in the violence was deftly turned into an occasion for aggrieved Gujarati pride and the pogrom itself became something of a badge of honour, evidence of a Hindu strongman's short way with an entitled minority. The butchery in Naroda Patiya, the rapes, the systematic destruction of mosques and dargahs, the deliberate marginalization of Gujarati Muslims as treacherous aliens came to be seen as signs of nationalist virility not communal savagery. The serious allegations against Modi and Amit Shah were formally dismissed by tribunals and courts and the BJP politicians who were sent to jail had their sentences lightened by bail and parole. Most importantly, Modi won election after election in Gujarat and finally swept the 2014 general elections to become the prime minister of India, not despite the Gujarat pogrom but in large part because of it.

In the twenty years between 1983 and 2002, it is retrospectively obvious that the organized, large-scale killing of religious minorities in the name of Hindu grievance became a springboard to political power. This is not the same as arguing that in every case the killings were premeditated; it is to say, though, that politicians and political parties learn through experience and Nellie, Delhi, Bombay and Gujarat were dots on a steep learning curve. (This is not an exhaustive list. The killing of a thousand people in Bhagalpur in 1989, more than ninety per cent of whom were Muslims, was every bit as bloody as the four pogroms detailed here.)

These two decades see two sorts of lessons learnt: a) the potential of violence as both a political statement and a form of mobilization in the name of Hindu grievance and b) the impunity with which this violence could be inflicted because of the institutional bias in the civil administration and the police against minorities in general and Muslims in particular.

The point about Hindu grievance is crucial. In Assam, the grievance was illegal Bangladeshi - Bengali Muslim - immigration. This was a deeply felt issue given the huge demographic shifts that occurred in the build-up to and the aftermath of the war of 1971. The AASU leaders argued at the time that they were opposed to all illegal migrants from Bangladesh, not just Bengali Muslims, and some of them might have been sincere, but given the faith of the majority of the migrants, the conflation of Bangladeshi and Muslim was inevitable.

Also, no other migrants offer political returns of the sort that Muslims do. The migration of Bangladeshi Muslims is resisted by locals in the Northeast as a creeping transformation of their homelands. The case of Tripura is instructive in this context. Massive migration, first from East Pakistan and then Bangladesh, turned a small tribal state into a state with a large Bengali majority in the space of two decades. For aboriginal communities in the Northeast, the fate of Tripura became a cautionary tale but this 'swamping' had no political resonance because the Bengali migrants in question were overwhelmingly Hindu. Hindu migration cannot be an occasion for violence of the Nellie sort: the State wouldn't permit it.

The grievance in 1984 was two-headed: the assassination of a charismatic prime minister and the pre-history of Khalistani terrorism. It was politically possible because a communalized police force was willing to do the bidding of feral Congress politicians and Rajiv Gandhi was willing to look the other way. The importance of 'Hindu' feeling was evident again in the Bhagalpur pogrom when Rajiv Gandhi cancelled the transfer of the superintendent of police of Bhagalpur who had allowed the mobs to rampage unchecked in the face of protests from local Hindus and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad.

In 1992-93, the Shiv Sena and the BJP used the burning of the Radhabai chawl in Bombay as a provocation for violence against Muslims generally. In Gujarat, it was the burning of the railway coach and the ghastly deaths of the Hindus inside that became both the cue for the pogrom at the time and the justification for it afterwards. The politics of provocation is unequal: for a Muslim to argue that the razing of the Babri Masjid and the killing of Muslims in the wake of the vandalism were reasons enough for him to set about Hindus in his neighbourhood would be absurd, but when the roles are reversed, Hindu grievance is always plausible and violence in its name is invariably profitable.

Why have pogroms in the majoritarian cause become drivers of Indian politics over the past thirty five years? One answer is that they haven't. India's republican history is dotted with communal riots and these eruptions are just more of the same. This is clever but untrue. The scale of the violence, the complicity of the police and the administration and, most of all, the immediate political dividends that accrue represent a real change in the nature of republican politics. The reasons for that change need another column.

India: Teenaa Kaur's documentary film on the survivors of the Genocide of Sikhs in 1984 in Widows Colony, New Delhi

1984, When the Sun didn’t Rise
A documentary on the survivors of the Genocide of Sikhs in 1984 in Widows Colony, New Delhi

by Teenaa Kaur Pasricha

Trailer-1984, When the Sun didn't Rise from Teenaa Kaur on Vimeo.

https://whenthesundidntrise.wordpress.com/

India: A time to seek ‘closure’ of 1984 . . . (Harish Khare)

The Tribune - Feb 12, 2017

A time to seek ‘closure’ of 1984…

Harish Khare   

 

Between now and March 11 is perhaps the only time when it is possible to talk about the politics of justice for the 1984 anti-Sikh riot victims. At least till March 11, Punjab is in a pleasant state of a very agreeable limbo because the professional politicians are on a forced vacation. They know their exertions would have no consequence or value whatsoever. It is time to ask the question as to how long the professional politician would prevent a 'closure' on this painful episode in the history of the Sikhs, Punjab and India.  The immediate provocation for this thought is the newspapers’ report of last Friday (10th). According to a report of The Tribune, the CBI wants Jagdish Tytler to undertake a lie-detection test in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots’ case. After 33 years! What a farce, what travesty of justice, what a mockery of the so-called investigation by a so-called premier investigative agency! That moment in 1984 was a horrific shame. It certainly violated then — and it violates now — our collective sense of fairness and justice that so many innocent people should have lost their lives and honour. On the political front, the Congress party has been electorally punished many times over since 1984. In 2005, a Prime Minister had offered an apology in Parliament. Yet, no ‘closure’ is permitted.  If the insistence is that those ‘guilty’ should be punished, then after thirty years, it is fair to ask a question: why have we failed to punish them? The convenient accusation is that the likes of Jagdish Tytler have been able to frustrate and sabotage the processes of justice. But surely, we do know that since 1984, we have had some non-Congress governments, at the centre and in the state. And, in fact, so many commissions of inquiry have been announced and instituted. Yet, none has secured ‘justice’ for the victims. We also do know that periodically, politicians have helped themselves to a few brownie points with the Sikh voters.  The great hypocrisy is that everyone knows what the game is all about. Instead of making a sincere effort to locate collective responsibility for a historic wrong, the search for ‘justice’ has been reduced to a political argument — to be brushed up and brandished at election for partisans purposes.  No one has ever proposed in concrete terms what kind of ‘justice’ would be a satisfactory outcome and would invite a ‘closure.’ Journalists and historians, too, have got ensnared in the politicians’ game. On the eve of every Lok Sabha election, a few ‘investigative’ journalists come up with ‘new evidence.’ It has suited the politicians — the Akali Dal and other outfits — to keep demanding ‘justice’ for the ‘victims.’ The Akali Dal finds it a good stick to beat the Congress with. But, that is a game others have learnt to play. Newer outfits keep accusing the Akali leaders of failing to get ‘justice’ for the victims.  Individual lawyers, the Phoolkas of this world, have made a career — and, now an electoral career — out of this less than honest quest for ‘justice.’ And, the busybodies in North America have given a dangerous twist to this whole ‘injustice’ business.  In the process, a grave damage has got inflicted on entire Punjab — including the vast majority in the Sikh community itself. The politics of victimhood has allowed the Akali Dal and its ally, the BJP, to become indifferent to the call of good governance.  An obscure journalist shoots to fame because he throws a shoe at the Home Minister of India in the name of the ‘1984 riot victims’. It would be a wonderful comeuppance for the Akalis if that same gentleman is able to cook the Badals’ goose in Lambi.  A few days ago, when I was in Deoband (in Saharanpur district of western Uttar Pradesh), I got a chance to meet Haseeb Siddiqui, general manager of the Muslim Fund Trust, a kind of bank for the poor, an institution that practises the Islamic stipulation of not charging interest on loans given. This institution has been at it since 1961 and Janab Haseeb Siddiqui was there at the very start and continues to preside over it even at the age of 78, with an undiminished clarity of purpose. Siddiqui sahib is a city elder. He is associated with many schools, an eye hospital, a library and some training centres. With great pride, he told me that he had only a pen and nothing else when it was decided to set up a banking outfit, based on Islamic tenets, and since then, sheer dedication and faith have helped him steer the expansion and consolidation of this ‘fund trust.’ It is vibrant evidence of the civil society and its potential to fill the gaps left unattended by the state. What I found rather engaging about visiting the Muslim Fund Trust and meeting its general manager was a sense of serenity, an unperturbed sense of direction. Even though he wore traditional attire, there was nothing stereotypical about him. A modern, practical mind at work.  A horrific, horrific death has been reported from Sector 9 of Chandigarh. When I came to this city about eighteen months ago, I was told that Sector 9 was the last bastion of civilisation, it was an enclave of superiority and sophistication. It certainly has the reputation of being the most affluent part of City Beautiful. And, now we learn of this horrible death, a violent death, in the sector involving a luxury car and a cast of characters that can only be called ‘raeeszadas.’ It is of course deeply disappointing that the police have been seen dragging their feet because the accused happen to be ‘well connected.’ The police ‘moved’ only because the victim’s family was equally well connected and was able to bring to bear its own clout. This utterly violent death tells us only one thing: something is going horribly wrong in our society. We are becoming too angry, too edgy, too prone to giving offence and equally prone to taking offence. Our popular culture — films, television, pop singers — promotes a roughness in manners and morals. The counterpoise is missing. For an ancient society that takes inordinate pride in its civilisational resilience, the role models are few and far between. The schools are no longer imparting attitudes and values of moral rectitude. Even religious leaders have become petty entrepreneurs, hawking their wares and wisdom in the marketplace. The advertisers are vacuum-cleaning all noble values and healthy sentiments of their meaning by associating them with this or that product. There is a new feel of violence in the air. The Prime Minister is leading the way. Each day, he injects a note of aggression in his words and, what is more, he invites all of us to feel good about it. This daily exhibition of violent words has become the ‘new normal.’ Then, we have the wonderful blessing called the social media. We abuse and invite abuse and feel fully fulfilled being abusive. The anonymity allows us to be uncouth and uncivilised. History bears witness to a simple fact: violence in words invariably leads to violence in deeds, in the streets. I am afraid, soon we shall see violence in our Parliament.  LAST week I found myself in Deoband, the seat of the great Darul Uloom. Deoband suddenly brings you face-to-face with the diversity of Indian culture. I was there to try to make some sense of the electoral chemistry being cooked up; it was imperative that I should seek out influential voices in the town. The only problem was that the streets were too narrow for our SUV. Though the weather was fine, walking from one interlocutor to another would have been too time-consuming. Our local host had a solution: we pillion-ride with him on his motor-bike. So, it came about that I found myself having to ride a bike after nearly thirty years.  It was a hair-raising experience. Three of us, without helmets; it was nerve-wrecking. All the associations came flooding to mind. Robert Pirsig’s book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Bob Dylan crashing his motorbike. For those fleeting minutes I tried to practise what the Zen practitioners call ‘mindfulness.’ Nothing worked.  What does work is a bracing drink of hot, piping coffee. Try it.

India: Photos from public discussion on 20 Oct 2016 at Ramjas College about 1984 Anti-Sikh massacres

Poster announcing the event
On 20 October 2016 the History Society and the English Society of Ramjas College, University of Delhi, arranged a discussion on the violence against Sikhs in 1984. Speakers were Urvashi Butalia, Darshan Kaur and Sanam Sutirath Wazir, and the moderator was Sadhvi Kumar

Photos of the events posted here were taken by Mukul Dube

India: A discussion on the massacre of Sikhs in 1984 (20 Oct 2016 - Ramjas College, University of Delhi)

India: We Best Remember Partition When We Connect the Dots from 1947 to 1984 and 2002 (Ravinder Kaur)

The Wire - 15 August 2016

We Best Remember Partition When We Connect the Dots from 1947 to 1984 and 2002
By Ravinder Kaur on 15/08/2016

Urvashi Butalia in her acclaimed work The Other Side of Silence (1998) recounts how partition came alive for her in the aftermath of 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom in Delhi. In the refugee camps where she volunteered, she often heard the older people say ‘this is like partition again.’ She writes, “it took 1984 to make me understand how ever-present partition was in our lives too, to recognise that it could not be so easily put away inside the covers of history books. I could no longer pretend that this was a history that belonged to another time, to someone else.’

The human suffering of partition has been documented extensively since Butalia’s work was published nearly two decades ago. An entire generation of younger scholars was inspired to look to the human experience of brutal violence, loss and displacement to make full sense of the event of partition. That partition was not just a timeline of political decisions and confabulations among the elite leaders – Nehru, Jinnah and Mountbatten – was homed in forcefully via oral histories and personal accounts of those whose lives were violently disrupted by high level politics. The effort to put individual trauma at the heart of partition history has by now become a vastly popular project – both within and beyond academy. Examples include the California based ‘1947 Partition Archive’ and the ‘Partition Museum’ project among others that seek to memorialise partition by collecting and exhibiting memories and objects that we are left with. These are laudable projects. To underline non-partisanship, these efforts are even publicised as ‘apolitical’ that solely focus on what is popularly called the ‘human dimension’ of partition.

Yet there is something deeply unsettling in this increasingly depoliticised notion of human suffering in this memorialisation project. And more so when the memorialised past stands in isolation from the present. This wish to remember and memorialise partition inevitably invites parallels to memorialisation projects in the USA, Japan and Israel among others. The 9/11 memorial in New York, the Hiroshima peace memorial, and Yad Vashem in Jerusalem are some notable examples of public remembrance of human tragedy that mass violence inflicts. The idea is not only to honour the dead, to heal the wounds and to give voice to those silenced, but also to serve as a deterrent for future generations, as a reminder of destruction that human beings are capable of unleashing. In short, choosing to remember or forget, to publicly speak or remain silent are always deeply political gestures.

A quick look, however, at hundreds of personal testimonies amassed by now shows that the complexities of partition politics have been ironed over within this highly affective albeit simple narrative of human suffering. The human subject in this project is a free-floating agent disconnected from the realm of ‘politics’ – a word almost invoked with disapproval– where politics is largely understood as state or national level negotiations by big leaders. That personal and collective negotiations, transgressions and compromises underpinning messy social relations in everyday life also constitute politics is barely acknowledged. The subject of memorialisation we increasingly meet is mostly a passive victim of circumstances and almost never a willing participant in the events that unfolded. In other words, the space for complexities and contradictions is steadily erased once the affective project of memorialisation begins overshadowing the project of critical history.

The question that interests me concerns the work of public memorialisation in refashioning specific histories. Or put differently, the kind of remembrance of human suffering that is shaped within this depoliticised space, and its secession from the messiness of everyday life. One might argue that memorialisation precisely entails sacralisation of suffering, an acknowledgement of the wound inflicted on the victim, and therefore beyond debate. In the context of partition history, we are yet to make full sense of this unfolding moment when the wound, the suffering is not only publicly acknowledged but also memorialised. A few trends, however, are already visible.

For one, partition memorialisation now marks it as a unique event set apart from other events of communal violence. Indeed, the scale of violence and the historical background of India and Pakistan’s independence from the British colonial rule make it distinct. Yet, on the ground, the stories of organised mass murders, sexual violence and loss of property sound familiar. This quest to mark partition as a unique event reminds one of the debates on Holocaust that stress on its uniqueness, its difference from other events of genocide in the world. To be sure, all histories are unique and context specific, but the claims of uniqueness are essential to any mobilisation of collective identities.

What work, then, does the discourse of partition’s uniqueness perform? To begin with, it readily disconnects partition from Delhi 1984, Gujarat 2002, Muzzafarnagar 2013 and many other instances of mass violence that have occurred in postcolonial India and Pakistan. This is ironical given that it was the 1984 pogrom that generated widespread interest in the partition violence. Yet partition memory projects remain silent, and almost never connect the dots between 1947 and 2013.

Two plausible reasons underpinning this silence might be considered. First, any acknowledgment of the human suffering of 1947 together with that of 1984, 2002 and 2013 would mean recognizing the inherently political and contentious nature of violence – the political patronage, police complicity, the organized operators on the ground, the otherwise decent people who decide to overlook brutality, and delayed justice in court rooms. This would also take away the cover of ‘apolitical’ from human suffering. After all, it is not human folly, but state machinery that fails to protect its subjects. To bring partition out of the covers of history books would require taking a stand for not all violence is reciprocal or equally weighted.

Second, the memorialisation of partition allows us to collectively project our anger and despair away from the present instances of collective violence. The partition testimonies enable us to talk, and put in the public domain the horror of mass violence but without the intense contentiousness of 1984 or 2002. After nearly seven decades, partition has come to occupy a safe zone where horror at mass murders and rapes can be expressed aloud without attracting retaliation. This is what probably makes it unique in some ways.

Perhaps the project of memorialisation can be turned around and pressed forward – to document, record and speak of ‘our partitions,’ as Butalia had originally suggested. After all, once we have stripped the partition memory project of its historical uniqueness, what we are left with is brutal violence and loss that speaks of our times.

Ravinder Kaur is the author of Since 1947: partition Narratives among the Punjabi Migrants of Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2007.

Call for Papers : (E)razed Chapters: Remembering the Tales of Mourning Carnage ’84

Call for Papers

(E)razed Chapters:
Remembering the Tales of Mourning
Carnage ’84

Editor: Ishmeet Kaur

Introduction
In 1984, the capital city Delhi along with some other major cities nation-wide, like Bokaro and Kanpur witnessed four days of violence against the Sikh populations residing in them. The carnage was a consequence of the assassination of the then Prime Minister Mrs Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards. The situation in Delhi and in many places across India was no less than a civil war as Sikhs were being identified and killed by the mob. Post violence, anger towards the Sikh community was visible as the assassinators were the Sikh bodyguards, but thousands of those who were killed during the violence have not received legal justice till date.
The historical analysis reveals the political strategies by the governing party that led to uncontrollable and undesirable militant activities prevalent during early 80’s in Punjab and how this was converted into a communal discourse that led to the black listing of the Sikh Community. Historical similarity is visible in the communal tension during 1947 and that in 1984. The victims of ’84, who had witness ’47 could relate very closely to events of ’47 during ’84.
Thirty-one years down the line, it becomes important to voice the experiences of the victims. The main focus of the study is to address concerns of the present generations and the impact of the carnage on their life. Every human being has a right to live a decent living. Unfortunately, the impact of the events of a day pushed the Sikh community into corners as an “othered” minority. A visit to Tilak Vihar widow’s colony brings to fore the everyday struggle of the new generations, issues of rehabilitation, unemployment, drug addiction and criminal tendencies which is an outcome of the traumatic impact of the psyche of the victims and their families.
The three decades following ’84 Carnage, have been years of silence regarding the event. Very few writers, critics, poets and dramatists have written on the subject. 1947 partition also witnessed similar silence regarding the violence but for a decade. In the following years, 1960 onwards witnessed a never-ending flow of writings, renderings, discussions, representations and various forms of expressions through TV serials, films, creative writing and academic research. On the other hand, 1984 carnage has met a distinct muting on the subject, may be due to political involvement or because of the gruesome nature of violence.
Institutionally, at all fronts, be it legal, political, religious or social, the subject has met little representation but huge censorship and deliberated muting. On the legal front, thousands of cases have been lying pending in the Indian courts for all these years. Not a single victim has been given any justice.
It becomes important to revisit such incidences so that they don’t get repeated again to people of any community what so ever. Such incidences are shameful blots on the nation and its people but the impact extends universally to all human beings. Thus, the silences need to be broken and common concern for human rights be voiced.


Aim and Objective:

The objective of the project is to prepare an anthology of writings related to the ’84 pogrom. Some works (fiction, non-fiction, poetry, and journalistic writings) are available, they are not sufficient. The project shall anthologize works already available in English, regional languages and translation in English, and invite new writings in several genres (fiction, non-fiction, poetry, drama, and autobiography and life-narratives) by writers, critics and victims of the violence.
The novelty of the anthology will be that there would be a section on life –narratives where oral histories of the victims shall be transcribed after being recorded having visited the Widows colony in Tilak Vihar, New Delhi. Also, a section on photographs would be included. These photographs shall be those which are already available and also new photos of the present condition of the widow’s colonies. Moreover, duly acknowledged news items related to the coverage of the event published in regional languages and in newspapers of different countries shall be included.
The project aims to study in detail the historical, political and literary aspects around Carnage ’84. Ironically, with the changing times, the dynamics of the aforesaid structure has undergone immense transformation. The community has felt threatened and suffered at the hands of its own people and from the ones to whom they provided security in the past. Moreover, there is a sense of utter betrayal since there was a complete breakdown of machinery and institutional structure.

Contributions may be submitted on any of the following sub-themes related to Carnage’84
i. Censorship and Deliberated Muting
ii. Narrating Violence
iii. Humiliation: Violence, Looting and Rape
iv. Contested Bodies and Psychic Influences
v. Recording the Silences
vi. Fear Psychosis and the Scare
vii. Identity-Markers and the Ma(r)king
viii. Democracy and Minority Rights
ix. Legal Justice and Majority Impact
x. Revisiting the Experience of Trauma
xi. The Survivor’s Guilt
xii. Recovering from the Trauma: Memory and Amnesia
xiii. After-Experience: Returning and Recovering
xiv. Overcoming and Hope
xv. Rewriting the Past: Significance and Limitations
xvi. Testimonials and Documentation: Formal Evidence v/s Real Experiences
xvii. Reviving the History: Revisiting Partition through the Carnage
xviii. Archiving the Records: Relevance, Importance and Limitations
xix. Media and Depiction of Violence
xx. Cinematic (mis)representation of the Violence and Trauma
Contributions may be submitted in form of prose, poetry, short stories, plays, life-narrative, interviews, oral-histories, any other experimental/creative forms of writing the experience. (Word limit may vary)
Critical papers may be limited to 5000 words.
Visual and Graphic representations may be photographs or scanned paintings, duly acknowledged.
Translations in English may be submitted along with the permission of the writer or publisher with the full papers. Details of original source may be provided with the abstract. The original source shall be printed along with the Translation.
Newspaper Coverage: News items published preferably in regional languages translated into English may be retrieved from archives (older newspapers) and may be submitted for reprinting. Contributions from News items related to the event published in archived newspapers abroad (in different countries) may be submitted. These submissions should acknowledge the source.
Contributions may be emailed to projectcarnage84@gmail.com
Important Dates:
Submission of Abstracts (500 words) : 1st Feb, 2016
Acceptance of Abstracts : 15th March, 2016
Submission of Final Papers/ Contributions : 1st Sept, 2016
Expected month of publication of the anthology : Dec, 2017

Note: The anthology is an outcome of a project supported by Central University of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.
Bio-note of the Editor:
Dr Ishmeet Kaur is an Assistant Professor of English in the Centre for English Studies at Central University of Gujarat, Gandhinagar. She has 12 years of teaching experience. Her latest works have been on issues related to violence, its after-effect and matters of representation. She has been involved in recording the women’s experiences largely with respect to literature from/ of the margins.
At present she is actively engaged in a project on “(E)razed Chapters: Remembering the Tales of Mourning Carnage ’84” funded by Central University of Gujarat, Gandhinagar. She has been working on Literatures from the Margins, Post-colonial Studies, Australian Literature and Sikh Studies. Along with the main stream Australian Literature, she has ventured into Indigenous studies of Australia and India.

She has been continuously translating women’s experiences from Punjabi into English and from English into Punjabi. She has translated works of Bushra Ezaj, Pakistani writer Just Before the Dream (2011) and Veena Verma, Punjabi Diasporic writer’s short stories from Punjabi into English (published in Indian Literature: A Journal by Sahitya Akademy); and Australian Aboriginal writer Jeanine Leane’s book Dark Secrets: After Dreaming (AD)1887--1961 from English into Punjabi (2014). She has lately published an edited volume on Patrick White, Patrick White: Critical Issues, 2014. She has several articles in various books and Journals.

At CUG, she has been engaged in teaching courses such as Marginality and Literature, Nation and Literature, Indian Literature, Translation Studies and Research Methods and is the Co-ordinator for Writing Skills Enhancement Project. She is also an Associate at IIAS, Shimla.

Anti Sikh Massacre - Who did it ? (Shamsul Islam)

31 YEARS AFTER THE 1984 MASSACRE OF SIKHS THE PERPETRATORS ARE YET TO BE TRACED

 Shamsul Islam

The India State is still searching for the criminals behind 1984 massacre of Sikhs even after elapsing more than three decades. This attitude proves once again that perpetrators of violence against minorities whether in case of Nellie massacre (1983), Sikh massacre (1984), massacre of Muslims in post-Babri mosque demolition (1992), Kandhmal violence against Christians (1997) and Gujarat genocide (2002) will never be punished. In nation-wide cases of horrible killing of Dalits since Independence the reality is as bad. The best Indian State would do is to establish commissions of inquiry and more commissions of inquiry.

In the case of 1984 massacre it is generally believed that the Congress cadres were behind this genocide. This may be true but there were other forces too which actively participated in this massacre and whose role has never been investigated. Those who were witness to the genocide of 1984 were stunned by the swiftness and military precision of the killer marauding gangs (later on witnessed during the Babri mosque demolition, burning alive of Dr. Graham Steins with his two sons, 2002 pogrom of the Muslims in Gujarat and cleansing of Christians in parts of Orissa) who went on a burning spree of the innocent Sikhs. This, surely, was beyond the capacity of the thugs led by many Congress leaders.

This document circulated by a prominent ideologue and luminary of RSS, Nana Deshmukh on November 8, 1984 may help in unmasking the whole lot of criminals involved in the massacre of innocent Sikhs who had nothing to do with the killing of Indira Gandhi. This document may also throw light on where the cadres came from, who meticulously organized the killing of Sikhs. Mr. Nana Deshmukh in this document is seen outlining the justification of the massacre of the Sikh community in 1984. According to him the massacre of Sikhs was not the handiwork of any group or anti-social elements but the result of a genuine feeling of anger among Hindus of India.

This document also shows the true degenerated and fascist attitude of the RSS towards all the minorities of India. The RSS has been arguing that they are against Muslims and Christians because they are the followers of foreign religions. Here we find them justifying the butchering of Sikhs who according to their own categorization happened to be the followers of an indigenous religion.

The RSS often poses as a firm believer in Hindu-Sikh unity. But in this document we will hear from the horse’s mouth that the RSS like the then Congress leadership believed that the massacre of the innocent Sikhs was justified. Deshmukh in this document is seen outlining the justification of the massacre of the Sikh community in 1984. His defence of the carnage can be summed up as in the following.

 1.     The massacre of Sikhs was not the handiwork of any group or anti-social elements but the result of a genuine feeling of anger.

2.      Deshmukh did not distinguish the action of the two security personnel of Indira Gandhi, who happened to be Sikhs, from that of the whole Sikh community. From his document it emerges that the killers of Indira Gandhi were working under some kind of mandate of their community. Hence attacks on Sikhs were justified. 

3.      Sikhs themselves invited these attacks, thus advancing the Congress theory of justifying the massacre of the Sikhs.

4.      He glorified the ‘Operation Blue Star’ and described any opposition to it as anti-national. When Sikhs were being killed in thousands he was warning the country of Sikh extremism, thus offering ideological defense of those killings.

5.      It was Sikh community as a whole which was responsible for violence in Punjab.

6.      Sikhs should have done nothing in self-defence but showed patience and tolerance against the killer mobs.

7.      These were Sikh intellectuals and not killer mobs which were responsible for the massacre. They had turned Sikhs into a militant community, cutting them off from their Hindu roots, thus inviting attacks from the nationalist Indians. Interestingly, Deshmukh would not mind having militant Hindus. Moreover, he treated all Sikhs as part of the same gang and defended attacks on them as a reaction of the nationalist Hindus. 

8.      He described Indira Gandhi as the only leader who could keep the country united and on the killing of such a great leader such killings could not be avoided.

9.      Rajiv Gandhi who succeeded Mrs. Gandhi as the Prime Minister of India and justified the nation-wide killings of Sikhs by saying, “When a huge tree falls there are always tremors felt”, was lauded and blessed by Nana Deshmukh at the end of the document.

10.    Shockingly, the massacre of Sikhs was being equated with the attacks on the RSS cadres after the killing of Gandhiji and we find Deshmukh advising Sikhs to suffer silently. Everybody knows that the killing of Gandhiji was inspired by the RSS and the Hindutva Ideology whereas the common innocent Sikhs had nothing to do with the murder of Mrs. Indira Gandhi.

11.    There was not a single sentence in the Deshmukh document demanding, from the then Congress Government at the Centre, remedial measures for controlling the violence against the minority community. Mind it, that Deshmukh circulated this document on November 8, 1984, and from October 31 to this date Sikhs were left alone to face the killing gangs. In fact November 5-10 was the period when the maximum killings of Sikhs took place. Deshmukh was just not bothered about all this.

Deshmukh document did not happen in isolation. It represented the real RSS attitude towards Sikh genocide of 1984. It may be relevant to know here that the RSS cadres did not come forward in defence of the Sikhs. The RSS is very fond of circulating publicity material, especially photographs of its khaki shorts-clad cadres doing social work. For the 1984 violence they have none. In fact, Deshmukh’s article also made no mention of the RSS cadres going to the rescue of Sikhs under siege. This shows the real intentions of the RSS during the genocide.
This document was published in the Hindi Weekly Pratipaksh edited by George Fernandes who later became Defence Minister of India in the NDA regime, in its edition of November 25, 1984 titled ‘Indira Congress-RSS collusion’ with the following editorial comment:

“The author of the following document is known as an ideologue and policy formulator of the RSS. After the killing of Prime Minister (Indira Gandhi) he distributed this document among prominent politicians. It has a historical significance that is why we have decided to publish it, violating policy of our Weekly. This document highlights the new affinities developing between the Indira Congress and the RSS. We produce here the Hindi translation of the document.”

[The Deshmukh document is reproduced below. It is translated here from Hindi by Shamsul Islam [parts of the document have been underlined for emphasis]
MOMENTS OF SOUL SEARCHING
Indira Gandhi ultimately did secure a permanent place at the doorstep of history as a great martyr. With her dynamism borne out of her fearlessness and dexterity, she was able to take the country forward like a colossus for over a decade and was able to build an opinion that she alone understood the realities of the country, that she alone had the ability to run the decadent political system of our corrupt and divided society, and probably that she alone could keep the country united. She was a great lady and her death as a brave leader had added to her greatness. She was killed by a person in whom she kept faith despite several complaints. Such an influential and busy personality was killed by a person who had the duty to protect her person. This act came as a blow not only to her admirers in the country and the world but also her critics. This cowardly and treacherous act of killing not only ended the life of a great leader but also killed, in the name of the Panth, the mutual faith of humanity. Explosion of sudden arson and violent hysteria throughout the country was probably a direction-less and improper expression of the hurt, anger and feeling of loss of her followers. Lakhs of her followers used to see her as the only defender, powerful protector, and a symbol of united India. It is a different matter whether this is right or wrong.

For these innocent and uninformed followers, the treacherous murder of Indira Gandhi was the tragic culmination of the poisonous campaign of separatism, antagonism and violence conducted over the previous three years in which hundreds of innocents had to lose their invaluable lives and the sanctity of religious places was destroyed. This campaign assumed an ominous pace after the painful army action in June which, in the eyes of most of the people of the country, had become necessary to protect the sanctity of the religious places. Barring a few exceptions, the Sikh community observed silence for a long time on the barbaric massacres and heinous killings of innocent people, but they condemned the long-pending army action with anger and dangerous explosiveness. The country was stunned at their attitude. The army action was compared to the “gallu ghara” action of Ahmed Shah Abdali in 1762 to desecrate the Harmandir Sahib. Without going into the objectives of the two incidents, Mrs. Gandhi was pushed into the category of Ahmed Shah Abdali. She was termed the enemy of the Sikh panth and big prizes were announced on her head. On the other hand Bhindrawale who was guilty of heinous crimes against humanity in the name of religion was hailed as a martyr. Open display of such feelings in different parts of the country and abroad played a special role in increasing the distrust and alienation between the Sikhs and the rest of Indians. In the background of this distrust and alienation, stunned and bewildered people accepted the validity of the rumours of celebrations by the Sikhs at the heinous murder of Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards in retaliation of the army action. Of these the most hurting explanation was that of Giani Kripal Singh who being the Head Granthi considered himself to be the sole spokesman of the Sikh community. He said that he expressed no sorrow at the death of Indira Gandhi. This statement added fuel to the fire of boiling anger. No immediate and natural condemnation of this despicable statement by an important leader came from responsible Sikh leaders, intellectuals or organization. Therefore the already angered common and unimaginative people took it as correct that the Sikhs celebrated the death of Indira Gandhi. Because of this belief, selfish elements could succeed in making the common people become violent against the hapless Sikhs.

This was a most explosive situation which needed utmost patience and skillful conduct on behalf of our Sikh brothers. I am saying this, being a life member of the RSS, because on January 30, 1948 a Hindu fanatic, who was a Marathi and had no relation with the RSS, rather was a bitter critic of the Sangh, committed unfortunate killing of Mahatma Gandhi. On this occasion we also suffered the sudden eruption of hysteria, loot and atrocities of misdirected people. We ourselves saw how selfish elements who were well acquainted with this incident, deliberately declared a murderer to be a member of the RSS and also spread the rumour that the RSS people were celebrating throughout the country death of Mahatma Gandhi, and thus they succeeded in diverting the love and the feeling of loss and hurt in the hearts of people for Gandhi. Such feelings were spread against Swayamsewaks and their families, particularly in Mahrashtra.

Having gone through such experiences myself, I can understand the strong reaction and feeling of innocent Sikh brothers who became of victims of sudden eruption of people’s violent hysteria. In fact, I would like to condemn in strongest words the inhuman barbarity and cruelty on Sikh brothers in Delhi and elsewhere. I feel proud of all those Hindu neighbours who protected lives and property of troubled Sikh brothers without caring for their lives. Such things one being heard from all over Delhi. These things have practically increased the faith in natural goodness of human behavior and particularly faith in Hindu nature.

I am also worried at the Sikh reaction in such delicate and explosive situation. As an activist engaged in national reconstruction and unity for half a century and being a well-wisher of Sikh community I am hesitating in saying that if reactive armed action by Sikhs is even partly true then they have not been able to evaluate the situation correctly and comprehensively and as a result could not respond according to the situation. Here I wish to draw the attention of all my countrymen including Sikhs that in a similar difficult situation arising out of murder of Mahatma Gandhi when in the hysteria against the RSS crimes of destruction of property, heinous burning alive of children, inhuman cruelty etc. were being committed and the news was reaching Nagpur from all over India, then the ‘dictator’ of the RSS known as the so-called big private army, the then head of the Sangh late M.S. Golwalkar issued an appeal in Nagpur on February 1, 1948 to the lakhs of armed young followers throughout the country in the following unforgettable words:

‘I direct all my Swayamsewak brothers that despite spread of provocation due to lack of understanding, they should adopt cordial attitude towards all and remember that this mutual distrust and improper hysteria is the result of the love and respect that the whole country has for Mahatma who made the country great in the eyes of the world. We salute such great respected departed soul’.

These were not empty words to hide cowardice and helplessness in the hopeless situation. In those life threatening serious moments he proved that every word of his appeal had a meaning. On the evening of February 1, hundreds of Swayamsewaks in Nagpur urged for armed resistance and resisting till the last drop of their blood to stop the probable attack on their leader the same night. And some associates of Guruji told him of a conspiracy against his life and requested to shift his residence to a safe place before the attack, Guruji told them in such a black moment also that if the same people whom he had truly and with full ability, served throughout his life wanted to take his life, then why and for whom he should save his life. Thereafter he cautioned them in stern voice that even if a drop of blood of his countrymen was shed in saving him, then such a life would be useless for him. History is a witness that lakhs of Swayamsewaks spread throughout the country followed this directive word by word. Though they had to digest vulgarities in exchange of their patience and tolerance but there was a faith to give them patience that whatever may happen to them in present condition, history will definitely prove them innocent.

I hope that in present difficult situation my Sikh brothers will also show the above-referred patience and tolerance. But I am deeply pained to know that rather than displaying such tolerance and patience at some places they have retaliated against the crowd with arms and played into the hands of such selfish elements who were eager to spread the trouble. I am surprised how a section of our society considered to be most disciplined, organized and religious, adopted such a negative and self-defeating attitude. May be they could not get proper leadership at the moments of such a crisis. Through my scanty study and understanding of Sikh history I consider that such a nonpolitical reaction of Sikhs in moments of such a crisis came from their complete involvement with teachings of love, tolerance and sacrifice of Sikh nature. Warrior nature of Sikh religion was a short time provision against barbarity of foreign Mughals which was taught by tenth Guru. For him Khalsa was a relatively small part of a broad Hindu-Sikh brotherhood and was designed as an armed hand to defend Hindu community and its traditions. Guru Govind Singh laid down for Khalsa followers five KS (Kesh, Kripan, Kangha, Kara and Kachha) and ‘Singh’ in the name of Khalsas. This was a symbol of their being soldiers. But unfortunately today these only are being projected as basic and necessary forms of Sikh religion.

I am sorry to say that Sikh intellectuals too have failed to understand that conversion of Sikh religion into Khalsaism is a much later event and this was due to deliberate plan of British imperialists to divide and rule in Punjab. Its aim was to cut the Sikhs off from their Hindu environ. Unfortunately, after independence power hungry politicians kept alive for their own interest the unnaturally born problems of separation and equal existence, and carried forward the game of imperialists to divide and rule by their vote bank politics. This improper equating of Sikhs with militant Khalsaism is not only the basic root of separatist tendencies in some parts of Sikh community, but it also raised militancy and faith in the power of weapons to the level of religious worship.

This religious worship gave rise to terrorist movement like Babbar Khalsa in the second decade and recently Indira Gandhi was killed as a result of
terrorist wave under the leadership of Bhindrawale and a long ‘hit list’ is yet to be executed.

I used to imagine that Sikh community has freed itself totally from illiteracy, ignorance, frustration and defeatism in which it was in the fifth decade of 19th century after losing its freedom and which was exploited by cunning British imperialists and selfish Sikh elites for their selfish interests. It is clear that in eighth decade Sikhs adorning the places of high responsibility represent highly educated, laborious, vigilant, relatively rich, enlightened and active section of Indian society in every walk of life. In nineteenth century their experiences and vision was limited to the boundaries of the then Punjab but today they are spread not only throughout India but throughout the world, and they are in a situation to directly know the conspiracies of big powers which are being hatched against independent and united India rising strongly in the world. In such an advantageous situation they should know their historical development as an integral part of India.

Such a revaluation of history will give them the opportunity to see many wrong formulations of their own religion and past which has been systematically drilled into their brains by wrong and distorted historical writings by British administrators and intellectuals about nature and development of their religion. Such an attempt will take them to their real roots.

This is the time that our Sikh brothers should search their hearts so that they can get rid of the false description inserted by British imperialists and power greedy opportunist people into their basic religious nature. Removal of such false descriptions is necessary to bridge the gulf of distrust and alienation between two communities of similar destiny, nature and similar traditions. I am afraid that without such a self-introspection and revaluation of history they would not be able to live with peace among themselves and with other countrymen. A disinterested analysis of their own enlightened interests will be enough to make them understand that their fate is indivisibly linked with the destiny of India. Such an understanding will save them from falling prey to the disruptive and destructive interests of foreign powers.

I disbelieve [sic] that my Sikh brothers will accept the cautious words of spiritual expression of a well-wisher.

Lastly, it is not to deny the truth that sudden removal of Indira Gandhi from Indian political scene has created a dangerous void in the Indian common life. But India has always displayed a characteristic inner strength in the moments of such crisis and uncertainty. According to our traditions, responsibility of power has been placed on the inexperienced shoulders of relatively young person in a lively and peaceful manner. It will be hasty to judge the potentialities of his leadership at this time. We should give him some time to show his ability.

On such challenging juncture of the country, in the meanwhile he is entitled to get full cooperation and sympathy from the countrymen, though they may belong to any language, religion, caste or political belief.

In the capacity of a nonpolitical constructive worker I only hope and pray that God bless him with more mature, balanced, inner strength and ability to give an impartial Govt. to the people so that he can take the country to real prosperous unity and glory.

Guru Nanak Divas
November 8, 1984
Nana Deshmukh

Book release announcement: 'Sikhs:The Untold Agony Of 1984' by Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay (28 Oct 2015, New Delhi)

A 1984 leaflet by a far left group in Delhi in wake of anti sikh riots

http://sacw.net/article11839.html

India: A festering sore on Indian democracy (Cover story Tehelka, 2015-04-11 , Issue 15 )

http://www.tehelka.com/a-festering-sore-on-indian-democracy/
Tehelka Magazine, Volume 12 Issue 15, Dated 11 April 2015

A festering sore on Indian democracy
A multitude of massacres in the name of religion has put India’s secular polity to test. A flashback on the travesty of justice. By Pradyot Lal, NK Bhoopesh & Anurag Tripathi

MORADABAD

MORBIDITY AT LARGE

13 August 1980

• Official toll: 450; independent probes reckon that to be one-third of the likely number of casualties

• In the aftermath of the riots, Allahabad High Court judge Justice MP Saxena was asked to inquire

• Three-and-a-half decades later, his findings remain virtually consigned to a waste paper basket, with even avowedly secular parties not having the courage to pick up the gauntlet

If ever a comprehensive study is undertaken to determine the role of law-enforcing agencies in ‘helping’ spread communal riots in free India, what happened in somnolent Moradabad where all that glitters is brass is instructive. Around 3,000 namazis had turned up at the idgah to render Friday prayers when some pigs mysteriously found their way there causing instant commotion. What followed was even more macabre, as the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) personnel on duty failed to chase away the offending animals in time. Instead, as brickbatting of the police and PAC personnel ensued, they indiscriminately opened fire causing several in the congregation to die instantly. There was already enough tension between the factory owners and the artisans who were usually drawn from different communities. The demographic structure of the city, however, was not reflected in its political representation.

Two generations after the riot, the scars are yet to heal. As sociologist Satish Sabherwal and historian Mushirul Hasan averred a couple of months after the riots, neither the then UP chief minister Vishwanath Pratap Singh nor the leaders at the Centre went beyond offering palliatives to the victims. This was ‘democratic’ India’s second tryst with the PAC after the revolt in its ranks in the mid-1970s had threatened to upstage the Congress in Uttar Pradesh.
Shame! Bodies of infants killed during the 1983 massacre in Nellie, Nagaon district, Assam, await burial

Shame! Bodies of infants killed during the 1983 massacre in Nellie, Nagaon district, Assam, await burial, Photo: Courtesy The Milli Gazette

NELLIE MASSACRE

SIX HOURS OF MAYHEM

18 February 1983

• Official toll: 2,191; unofficial and independent agencies reckon twice that number was approximate to the truth

• Affected area: Central Assam, especially Nellie in Nagaon district

• The SK Tiwari Commission ostensibly conducted an inquiry, but it was caught up in a political and social maelstrom. Only three copies of its report exist and no political party has thought it worthwhile to do anything concrete

THE immediate cause is difficult to decipher. One was the anti-foreigner issue that the then ascendant All Asom Students Union (AASU) raised to a feverish pitch, leading to deportation of alleged aliens and mass murder. The terms of the movement were hazy since many of the so-called refugees had either come before Partition or during the turmoil in Bangladesh during its liberation struggle. The death of Lok Sabha MP Hiralal Patwari made fresh polls necessary in one of the constituencies but the Congress government thought it prudent to order fresh Assembly polls in 1983. AASU opposed the decision and boycotted the polls. As the then Assam DGP KPS Gill recalls, there were at least 23 highly sensitive constituencies where elections should not have been held, and Nellie was one of them. Whether there had indeed been a sudden infiltration of illegal immigrants could not be verified. AASU thought that to be the case and stirred an agitation that the state administration failed to control. Two years later, the then prime minister Rajiv Gandhi signed a peace accord with AASU and the Nellie massacre was sought to be erased from public memory.
Wounded An injured Sikh man being carried away on a cart in Delhi during the 1984 riots, Photo: Courtesy Vijay Saluja

Wounded An injured Sikh man being carried
away on a cart in Delhi during the 1984 riots, Photo: Courtesy Vijay Saluja

ANTI-SIKH RIOTS

72 HOURS OF SHAME

Delhi and other parts of India

31 October – 4 November 1984

• Total casualties in Delhi alone: 2,733 Sikhs; some human rights bodies say it was much higher

• Worst-affected areas included Trilokpuri, which epitomised the grisly and planned nature of the massacre

• Eight different commissions, convictions extremely few

Thirty-one years ago in New Delhi, Kanpur and Bokaro, murderous attacks were launched against Sikhs by mobs organised and instigated by mainly Congress politicians bent upon using the tragic assassination of Indira Gandhi as an occasion for political manipulation and gain. In the capital, the police stood mute witness to the killing of 2,733 Sikhs. That inaction and the failure to register cases or properly investigate those that were eventually filed are testimony to the official patronage the killings enjoyed. Rajiv Gandhi, who had just been sworn in as the prime minister, made light of the pogrom, describing it as a reaction to the killing of his mother. He infamously said, “When a big tree falls the earth shakes.” Senior Congress leaders such as HKL Bhagat, Jagdish Tytler and Kamal Nath, who were identified by the survivors and eyewitnesses as instigators of the violence, were rewarded with ministerial berths. A Commission of Inquiry headed by Justice Ranganath Mishra concluded, astonishingly, that the organised massacre was a spontaneous and “involuntary reaction” by ordinary citizens stricken by grief at Indira Gandhi’s assassination. Subsequent commissions indicted the police for acts of commission and omission but the bitter reality is that the victims of the massacre are no closer to justice today than they were in 1984.

The fact that the politicians and police officers responsible for the violence not only escaped indictment but also prospered had grave implications for minorities elsewhere in India. The riot system perfected by the Congress on the streets of Delhi was unveiled again in Bombay in 1993 and, finally, by the BJP government of Gujarat in 2002. There have been demands to construct at least a memorial for the victims, but they have fallen on deaf ears. Non-Congress governments have been equally lackadaisical and cavalier in their attitude. Some ultra-Hindutva organisations and individuals, unhinged formally from the saffron brigade, also joined the unprecedented, brutal pogrom that damaged India’s secular image irrevocably and gave rise to secessionist tendencies.
Easy targets Armed personnel round up Muslim men in Hashimpura during the 1987 riots

Easy targets Armed personnel round up Muslim men in Hashimpura on 22 May 1987, Photos: Praveen Jain

HASHIMPURA MASSACRE

SELECTIVE WARFARE

22 May 1987

• Death toll: 42 Muslim men

• In 2015, a Delhi court acquitted all the PAC men accused of killing 42 Muslims

Vibhuti Narain Rai, the then SSP, Ghaziabad (UP), found that more than 150 Muslim men had been taken away by the PAC in a truck at gunpoint towards a canal that flows parallel to the Meerut-Ghaziabad Road and that the sound of gunshots had been heard from that direction. It was late in the night but he got a team of 20 police personnel ready and rushed to the spot. Dead bodies were scattered along the canal bank. In that ghostly silence, he began to examine the bodies to see if anyone was alive in the heap of corpses. At last he found a man who was still not dead, brought him to Ghaziabad, got him admitted to a hospital and proceeded to file an FIR against the PAC personnel for their heinous crime.

Babuddin Ansari is one of the survivors of the massacre. He is a native of Muzaffarpur, Bihar, but fate had trapped him in Hashimpura in May 1987 as he was visiting some relatives with his father. 
According to his account, he took a bullet on his shoulder when the PAC men had first opened fire on the people held captive in a police truck near the Gang canal in Muradnagar. By the time they moved the truck away from the canal, 25 of the men had been killed. The truck was driven a little further and then stopped near the Hindon river bridge where the rest of the captives — 16 of them — were killed. In this group, Babuddin was the only one who survived. He was the sixth person to be thrown into the river, but before that, he was shot again — this time in his leg.

Luckily for him, he fell near the embankment and held onto a rock. 
He recalls seeing bodies being thrown from the Hindon bridge one by one. Meanwhile, some policemen came flashing their torches at the river. Babuddin thought they were sent by the PAC men, so every time they threw the light upon the river, he would duck into the water. Finally, a policeman touched his head with a rifle and asked his name. From there, he was taken to the superintendent of police, who assured him of help. The Ghaziabad police then picked up his belongings from Hashimpura. Next day, he was escorted back to his home state.

Some of the survivors and relatives of the victims are still hopeful of getting justice even after a Delhi court acquitted the accused PAC jawans on 24 March 2015 citing the prosecution’s inability to establish that they were the same jawans who had fired those fatal shots.
Close shave Security personnel look on as a Muslim woman is rescued from rioters in Bhagalpur

Close shave Security personnel look on as a
Muslim woman is rescued from rioters in
Bhagalpur 1989

BHAGALPUR MASSACRE

TWO MONTHS OF MADNESS

24 October – 23 December 1989

• Official toll: 1,070

• Started as a police-people clash and degenerated into communal violence

• Justice elusive 25 years later, with Nitish Kumar periodically assuring action against the culprits, many of whom are already dead

Hindu-Muslims tensions had escalated during the Muharram and Bisheri Puja festivities in August 1989. As part of the Ayodhya campaign, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) had organised a ‘Ramshila’ procession in Bhagalpur. The procession aimed to collect bricks for the proposed Ram temple at Ayodhya. One such procession passing through Fatehpur village provoked brickbatting and arson on 22 October.

Prior to the outbreak of the riots, two rumours about the killing of Hindu students started doing the rounds: one was that Muslims had killed nearly 200 Hindu students of the university; the other that 31 Hindu boys had been murdered and their bodies dumped in a well at the Sanskrit College. Moreover, the political and criminal rivalries in the area also played a role in inciting the riots.

On 24 October, the Ramshila processions from various parts of the district were to proceed to the Gaushala area, from where they would move on to Ayodhya. The procession coming from Parbatti area passed peacefully through Tatarpur, a Muslim-dominated area, after its leader Mahadev Prasad Singh told the Hindus not to raise any provocative slogans. Sometime later, another massive procession from Nathnagar arrived at Tatarpur, escorted by the police. Some members of the procession shouted slogans such as ‘Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan‘. Bombs hurled indiscriminately at this stage are considered to have triggered these riots.

The mobs attacked shops owned by the Muslims on the Nathnagar road (later renamed as Lord Mahavir Path). The rioters also attempted to storm the Muslim-dominated locality of Assanandpur, but the locals fired at them from the rooftops. The mob then turned to the Hindu-dominated locality, Parbatti, where it massacred at least 40 Muslims. As the news of the violence reached the other Ramshila processions at Gaushala, the Hindus went on a rampage, killing Muslims, looting their shops and destroying their property.

On 25 October, an 8,000-strong mob looted and destroyed Madaninagar, a Muslim settlement, turning it into a ghost town. They also attacked Kanjhiagram, a nearby locality. Bhatoria, a Muslim-dominated village, was attacked twice — on October 25, and again on October 27. Many Muslims were killed. Alleged police atrocities further fuelled the violence.

According to contemporary accounts, on 26 October, at least 11 Muslims were killed in the Brahmin-dominated Parandarpur village. The same day, 18 Muslims, including 11 children, were killed in public view, in the Nayabazar area of Bhagalpur. Around 44 Muslims, including 19 children, were provided refuge by some local Hindus in the Jamuna Kothi building. At 11.30 am, a 70-strong mob entered the Jamuna Kothi with swords, axes, hammers and lathis. Within 10 minutes, 18 Muslims were killed. Some of the children were beheaded, some had their limbs cut off while the others were thrown off the third floor. A woman called Bunni Begum had her breasts chopped off. Some other Muslims, who had been provided refuge by the Hindus in the nearby buildings, managed to survive. In Assanandpur, the Muslims also escorted several Hindu students residing in a hostel to safety.
Lynch mob Sword-wielding rioters took over the streets of Mumbai for several days in December 1992

Lynch mob Sword-wielding rioters took over the streets of Mumbai for several days in December 1992

MUMBAI RIOTS

MEGAPOLIS GONE BERSERK

December 1992 – January 1993

• Official death toll: 267; the unofficial figure, as deposed before the Justice Srikrishna Commission, was twice that number

• Cause: The Babri Masjid demolition had serious repercussions across the country and the city that suffered the most was Mumbai

• Status: The revelations made by Justice Srikrishna failed to enlighten the political masters

A cosmopolitan city by nature, which hitherto had other priorities, was submerged in a communal deluge from December 1992 to January 1993. The city witnessed one of the worst riots during this period, which left deep scars on the city’s soul. The December 1992 events constituted the first phase of a communal riot that was to be repeated on a larger scale in January 1993.

The Justice BN Srikrishna Commission of Inquiry stated that there had been a build-up of communal fervour among the Hindus and Muslims in the weeks preceding the demolition of the Babri Masjid. As news of the demolition spread across the city on 6 December, Muslim gathered on the streets even as the Hindutva outfits took out victory processions.

The Shiv Sena led by its acerbic leader Balasaheb Thackeray celebrated the demolition by conducting a rally in the Dharavi slum. The situation deteriorated further on 7 and 8 December.

At many places, the violence took the form of a police-versus-Muslims confrontation. As per media reports, more than 210 people died in Mumbai and 57 in the areas adjoining the metropolis. Out of them, 137 (more than half the total casualties) fell to police bullets.

Unofficial records claim that the actual toll was more than 400. The situation was said to have been brought under control by 12 December, but according to the Justice Srikrishna Commission, stray incidents of violence continued to occur until 5 January when the second, deadlier phase of the riot started.

HYDERABAD RIOTS

A CITY PROVOKED

October-December 1990

• Cause: Local trouble exacerbated by LK Advani’s Rath Yatra and his subsequent arrest

• Consequence: The Congress party’s secular image was irrevocably dented

Walled city Hyderabad witnessed one of the worst communal riots in 1990. The city’s proud record was besmirched beyond recognition. On 9 October 1990, the city police gunned down a notorious criminal and some politicians gave this a communal angle. As per the Justice Heeraman Singh Commission of Inquiry, this eventually resulted in communal clashes. The second trigger for the clashes was the arrest of LK Advani in Bihar on 23 October. After Advani’s arrest, the BJP and some Muslim organisations distributed provocative pamphlets in Hyderabad. More than 11 people were killed in the communal clashes that followed between 29 October and 1 November in Hyderabad and its neighbouring Ranga Reddy district. Communal tension between the two communities was at its peak and to worsen the situation, two rumours started doing the rounds in the city. One was of the stabbing of a poor Hindu hawker in Karwar area on 7 December and the second was about the discovery of the bodies of a woman and her child in the Sabzimandi area. As per official records, the massacre that followed resulted in the killing of 134 people and 300 getting severely injured. The unofficial count of the dead was between 200 and 300. There was a clear pattern to the killings, with women and children being particularly targeted. Many were burned alive or stoned to death.

Various reports indicated that the violence was encouraged by some Congress dissidents in order to precipitate the overthrowing of the then chief minister Chenna Reddy, who, indeed, was forced to step down after the riots.

COIMBATORE

COMBUSTION AT LARGE

December 1997 – February 1998

• Death toll: At least 70, in two phases

• Cause: From business rivalry to divisive strains, the combustion in the city was expertly manufactured

That business is thicker than blood was proved during the Coimbatore riots. The riots that took place in 1997-98 were, perhaps, unique in nature as they were triggered by mounting tension between the Hindu and Muslim communities over the rising graph of Muslim businesses in the city.

The extremist Hindutva outfit Hindu Munnani’s leader Rama Gopalan had come to Coimbatore several times, asking Hindus to purchase only from Hindu shops. Moreover, relations between the police and the Muslims were at an all-time low after the bombing of the RSS office in Madras in 1993. The police were constantly on the lookout for members of Al-Ummah, an organisation led by SA Basha, one of the prime suspects behind the blast. The trust deficit between the police and the Muslims came to a boiling point when three young Al-Ummah members murdered a police constable. A section of the police, in connivance with the Hindu Munnani, targetted Muslim establishments. The violence the ensued lead to the death of 20 people.

While the situation was returning to normal, on 14 February 1998, a series of bomb blasts occurred in Coimbatore in which around 50 persons were killed and 200 injured. The bombings were carried out by Al-Ummah members in retaliation for the killing of Muslims by the police in November-December 1997. In the hours following the explosions, Hindu mobs attacked Muslim shops and properties. The government had to send in the army.

A judicial committee formed on 7 April 2000 under Justice PR Gokulakrishnan to probe the serial bombings confirmed that Al-Ummah was responsible for the blasts. The committee tabled its final report in the Tamil Nadu Assembly on 18 May 2000 and its recommendations were accepted in principle by the state government. The trial began on 7 March 2002 and as many as 1,300 witnesses were examined. Basha was found guilty of hatching a criminal conspiracy to trigger a series of explosions and was sentenced to life along with 12 others.

SOPORE MASSACRE

VALLEY OF TEARS

6 January 1993

• Official toll: 55 killed in firing by the BSF

• Follow-up: Several BSF personnel were suspended and a CBI inquiry ordered; in 2013, the CBI filed a closure report saying the witnesses failed to identify the lawbreakers

• Status: A judicial commission headed by Justice Amarjeet Choudhary was constituted but its term expired before it could submit its report

Many human rights activists consider Sopore, a town in Baramulla district of Jammu and Kashmir, to be synonymous with State repression in the sensitive border state. It all started after militants attacked BSF personnel at Baba Yousuf Lane near Sopore on 6 January 1993, killing one of them. But what happened after that in the town was unheard of in Kashmir’s recent history. In retaliation to the attack by the militants, the BSF men went berserk killing 55 civilians. Some eyewitness accounts claimed that the troopers also set many houses on fire. The BSF men also attacked a bus, killing the driver and 15 passengers on the spot. The Indian government’s estimate was that 50 homes and 250 shops were burnt down, though human rights activists claim that more than 450 shops were destroyed.

Even as the massacre evoked sharp responses from human rights organisations across the world, the Indian government initially defended the security forces saying that the civilian casualties were the result of a gun battle with the militants. But there were hardly any takers for the government’s version in Kashmir. Despite a curfew being imposed, thousands of people thronged the streets to protest against the killings, forcing the government to constitute a one-member judicial commission under Justice Amarjeet Choudhary.

The commission’s term expired in 1994 before it could come out with a report and the government did not grant it an extension. Some BSF personnel were suspended to pacify the people of Kashmir and a CBI inquiry was also ordered. The CBI filed a closure report in the court in 2013 saying that the witnesses could not identify the culprits. The investigating agency’s submission in the court that the victims’ kin should not get access to the documents related to the case also drew flak from many quarters. The unending wait of the victims in Sopore bears testimony to how the judiciary often fails to deliver justice in cases of atrocities by agencies of the State.
War cry A Bajrang Dal activist with an iron rod shouts slogans during the mayhem in Gujarat 2002, Photo: AFP

War cry A Bajrang Dal activist with an iron rod shouts slogans during the mayhem in Gujarat 2002, Photo: AFP

GUJARAT RIOTS

THE UNENDING TRAGEDY

February-March 2002

• Death toll: At least 2,000

• Status: The wounds of Gujarat are yet to be healed and the changed complexion of the Centre has not helped; the apex court, however, seems keen to strike out for justice

The parallels between 1984 and 2002 are uncanny. Like Rajiv Gandhi’s ‘Newtonian’ logic, Narendra Modi, anointed in 2001 as the chief minister of Gujarat, described the killing of innocent Muslims in his state as a spontaneous reaction to the burning of Hindu train passengers at Godhra. Activists of the BJP and other Sangh Parivar outfits led the mobs at various places and some, such as Maya Kodnani, were rewarded with plum ministerial posts. The Gujarat Police used the same tactics as their Delhi counterparts to ensure that investigations in the major riot cases went nowhere. The big difference between the aftermaths of the two riots, of course, is the greater degree of intervention by the Supreme Court in the case of Gujarat. The court intervened proactively when it became apparent that Modi’s government was not going to provide justice.

The Gujarat riots have been interpreted subjectively rather than objectively, depending upon where you stand. Some analysts call it a genocide or pogrom, whereas others describe it as a carnage or riot. Whichever way one looks at it, what happened in Gujarat in 2002 left an indelible mark on the secular fabric of the country. Some people even accused Modi of directing the police to allow the mob frenzy to go unchecked.

It all started with the burning of Coach S6 of the Sabarmati Express at the Godhra railway station on the morning of 27 February 2002. Fifty-seven people, including 25 women and 15 children, returning from a kar seva ceremony at the Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya were charred to death. The Gujarat government claimed that a mob of local Muslims had carried out the heinous crime. It constituted a judicial commission under Justice GT Nanavati to look into the reasons and conspiracy, if any, behind the carnage. Six years later, the commission submitted its report, largely upholding the government’s version of the incident.

When the UPA government came to power in 2004, Lalu Prasad Yadav, the then railway minister, constituted a committee to investigate the incident. This committee rejected the conspiracy theory and concluded that it was a case of accidental fire. It cited forensic reports to claim that the fire had started inside the train compartment. The Gujarat High Court, however, quashed the findings and concluded that the committee was constituted with mala fide intentions.

In February 2011, a court convicted 31 Muslims for the Godhra carnage, which is widely believed to be the trigger for the state-wide violence that followed in its wake.

The worst incident happened at Naroda Patiya in Ahmedabad. On 28 February, a mob of more than 1,000 activists of the Bajrang Dal and other Sangh Parivar outfits attacked the Muslim-dominated locality and killed 97 people. They looted and torched Muslim homes and gangraped women. The allegation that the Gujarat Police had connived with the mob was upheld by the court when it convicted Kodnani, who was the BJP MLA from Naroda constituency at the time of the incident and went on to become a minister in the Modi government from 2007 to 2009. A total of 32 people were convicted in the Naroda Patiya case.

The Gulbarg Society massacre also took place on 28 February. VHP and Bajrang Dal activists attacked the housing society where former Lok Sabha MP Ehsan Jafri lived. The 72-year-old Congress leader was killed along with 34 others. Many people went missing. It was later concluded that altogether about 70 people had been killed in the attack.

In 2007, TEHELKA did a sting operation (GUJARAT 2002: The Truth in the words of the men who did it) in which 14 VHP or Bajrang Dal activists — including Madan Chawal and Haresh Bhatt, who was the national coordinator of the Bajrang Dal in 2002 and went on to become the BJP MLA from Godhra — were caught on camera admitting their role in the riots. The Supreme Court appointed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by former CBI director RK Raghavan after serious allegations were raised against the then Modi government. But in its final report, the SIT found nothing to suggest Modi’s involvement in abetting the violence. Human rights organisations, however, continue to cry foul about this report.
Remains of the day A Bodo man sits in a burnt down room at his home in Kokrajhar, Assam

Remains of the day A Bodo man sits in a burnt down room at his home in Kokrajhar, Assam

KOKRAJHAR RIOTS

ETHNIC CAULDRON

July 2012

• Cause: Tension between locals and perceived “illegal migrants” from Bangladesh, which has been a perennial problem in the state since the 1950s

• Status: Political pussyfooting and periodic flare-ups are endemic

What happened in July 2012 in Assam left the nation in a state of shock. It put the spotlight back on ethnic violence in Assam, which has so far claimed the lives of a huge number of people and displaced many more. The ethnic Bodo tribe has clashed with migrants, mainly Bangla-speaking Muslims, several times since the 1950s.

The violence in Kokrajhar, a district in lower Assam bordering West Bengal, Bangladesh and Bhutan, could easily find a place among the 10 biggest communal clashes in Independent India. On 20 July 2012, four Bodo youngsters were lynched in Kokrajhar, allegedly by Muslim migrants, and then the native Bodos encircled villages dominated by Bangla-speaking Muslims and torched Muslim houses. These incidents had a domino effect across the state. The riots went on unabated for several days and eventually left more than 80 people dead and more than 50,000 displaced.

Even as the violence spread across more than 400 villages, a blame game ensued with the state government holding the Centre responsible for the failure to halt the violence and vice-versa. On 27 July, Assam Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi accused the then UPA government of delaying the deployment of the army in the riot-hit areas. The then prime minister Manmohan Singh visited riot-affected Kokrajhar the very next day and called the violence “a blot on the face of India”.

An indefinite curfew and shoot-at-sight orders had been enforced in Kokrajhar district since 26 July, along with a night curfew in Chirang and Dhubri districts. The prime minister ordered an inquiry committee to be set up to look into the violence and directed the state government to provide security so that the affected people could return home.

According to media reports, the army was initially reluctant to deploy its troops and sought a clarification from the defence ministry as the situation “seemed to have communal overtones”. When the situation deteriorated rapidly and another request was made, the ministry authorised army deployment on 25 July.

On 7 August, the Centre ordered a CBI probe into the ethnic clashes in the state and on 19 September, the investigation agency made the first arrests — that of five young men who were accused of involvement in the alleged lynching of the Bodo youths on 20 July. However, nothing substantial came out of the CBI enquiry and the state continues to witness ethnic clashes from time to time.

MUZAFFARNAGAR VIOLENCE

MANUFACTURED MAYHEM

August – September 2013

• Cause: A seemingly minor incident flared up into a massive denouement

• Status: The saffron brigade used the riots to manipulate and polarise even as the Samajwadi Party government hemmed and hawed

The Muzaffarnagar riots can easily qualify as the worst phase of violence in Uttar Pradesh in recent history. This was the first time in the past two decades that the army had to be brought in to restore law and order. The last time the army had been deployed was to contain the riots that erupted in the aftermath of the Babri Masjid demolition.

The 2013 riots in Muzaffarnagar and neighbouring districts in western UP were the outcome of political one-upmanship between the BJP and the Samajwadi Party. Both the parties brazenly manipulated the people with an eye on the impending Assembly bypolls in the state.

The situation in the district started deteriorating since 27 August, when two young Jat men were beaten to death in Kawal village, following the killing of a Muslim youth. The clashes occurred over an alleged incident of eve-teasing.

The Jats organised a ‘panchayat’ in Jaansat town on 31 August and demanded action against those who killed the two young men from the community. They also asked for the removal of the superintendent of police of Shamli district for his allegedly partisan conduct and declared that a ‘mahapanchayat’ would be organised on 7 September in Nagla Mandaur if the demands were not met.

On 5 September, the BJP gave a call for ‘Muzaffarnagar bandh’. To pre-empt the ‘mahapanchayat’, the administration imposed prohibitory orders under Section 144 of the CrPC in the entire district and deployed the PAC and the Rapid Action Force.

As soon as reports of attacks on participants of the mahapanchayat started doing the rounds, the situation went out of control. The police had to beat a hasty retreat in many places as the well-armed rioters outnumbered them. The district administration immediately imposed curfew. At least 62 people, including 42 Muslims and 20 Hindus, were killed in the violence, 93 injured and more than 50,000 displaced from their homes and villages. The displaced people found shelter in ill-equipped relief camps, where some of the children died in the following winter due to the freezing cold.

The Supreme Court held the Samajwadi Party prima facie guilty of negligence in preventing the violence and ordered it to immediately arrest all the accused irrespective of their political affiliation.

pradyot@tehelka.com | bhoopesh@tehelka.com | anurag@tehelka.com