MOB LYNCHING AND LEGAL RESPONSE (BY:MEENAL)

INTRODUCTION 

Mob lynching is one of the most disturbing and brutal phenomena witnessed in modern-day democratic society. It is a group non-legalised form of punishment, usually lethal, aimed at punishing someone perceived to have transgressed against communal or social mores and in the absence of due process. However, India, over the last few years, has been subject to a sharp rise in these reported cases, with the triggers being rumours, misinformation and communal tensions. These changes highlight the huge risk to the rule of law, human rights and social harmony.

Regardless of the fact that India is a democratic country with constitutional values and the rule of law, there are no sound mechanisms to respond to mob lynching. The criminal justice system has been criticised for being time-consuming in its adjudication process and not very beneficial as a deterrence and for its poor legal provisions to address this kind of an offence. The Supreme Court of India has already recognised the severity of the issue and provided preventive measures, but execution proves to be an insuperable step.

This paper thus elucidates the meaning of mob lynching, discusses the causative factors and the consequences, explores the legal setup in place, surveys landmark judicial outcomes, evaluates the decision of the court and provides extensive recommendations to curb the menace.

WHAT IS MOB LYNCHING?

Mob lynching is not a statutorily defined term under Indian law but broadly refers to extrajudicial killings tribally committed by a group of individuals who consider the individual thereby killed to have perpetrated some crime or otherwise done something that merits some retribution. This type of violence is group violence, and it is often as a result of community, race or social biases.

The origin of the word lynching can be dated back to the eighteenth century in America when informal organisations used violent methods to punish wrongdoers, mostly the Blacks. In India, lynching became closely linked to cow vigilantism, child-lifting rumours, interrelationships across faiths, and caste-related enmity. The spread of misinformation through social media creates an atmosphere of mistrust that can easily turn into physical violence through the mechanism of mob lynching. Perpetrators act with some level of impunity and anonymity, so it is not easy to hold them accountable, thus resulting in a culture of lawlessness and spreading fear everywhere.

CAUSES FOR MOB LYNCHING 

Mob lynching is not a special event: it cannot be considered outside socio-political, economic, psychological, and institutional determinants. An accurate knowledge of these determinants is essential toward addressing and preventing such occurrences.

1. Social and Religious bigotry

The increased level of religious and communal polarisation is one of the major contributors to mob violence and lynching in India. Very frequently, the victims of these mobs belong to the minority communities; the most common reasons behind such violence include accusations of cow killing, cross-religious relationships (so-called love jihad), and conversion. Extremist ideologies and political discourses that are around the delegitimisation of some groups of people foster a space where violence is justified.

2. Fake News and Social media

Social media, especially platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook, and Twitter, have by far contributed to magnifying the level of mob violence. Fake news about kids stealing, stealing cows, or committing blasphemy is spreading like bushfire and going unquestioned and creating mob violence. The sources of these platforms can hardly be traced due to the anonymity and speed of spreading that these platforms allow.

3. Law and Order collapse

Mobs in most cases take the laws into their own hands due to loss of trust in the work of the justice system. Slow prosecution, lengthy cases and low rates of conviction in cases result in the view that legal redresses are ineffective. Such a collapse will lead individuals to use vigilante justice.

 4. Patronage and patronage impunity 

Political bodies support or are directly or indirectly involved in mob violence in a number of instances. Protecting or even glorifying lynching by political leaders conveys very dangerous messages that this is a good thing to do. The impunity results in a culture of no prosecution of politically motivated mobs. 

 5. Caste-Based Prejudices 

Most of the mob lynchings are perpetrated on the basis of caste discrimination, especially against the Dalits and the excluded communities. Existing user bias and hierarchies based on social differences regularly develop into mob violence, especially when it comes to cases of inter-caste relationships, the right of access to general places or property disputes.

How are current legal mechanisms used to address mob lynching in India 

The current legal mechanisms against mob lynching in India are in the form of a set of existing criminal laws and judicial directions by various courts along with certain state-specific laws, since there is no specific anti-lynching law in India.

The perpetrators are also prosecuted under other general provisions offences like murder ( Section 302 IPC/ Section 101 BNS), attempted murder (Section 307 IPC), rioting ( Sections 147-149 IPC), and unlawful assembly.

The new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, has two special sections devoted personally to lynching by the mob (in Section 103(2) and in Section 117(4)) and is defined as an action by a group of people five or more persons, whose punishment is set between seven years and a life sentence or death penalty.

These give the policeman the legal ground to investigation, detention and trial.

Assam, Manipur and West Bengal have their own anti-lynching laws spelling out hard punishments and procedures to protect and rehabilitate victims.

Such measures notwithstanding, implementation is yet to be undertaken effectively owing to the unclear nature and political reasons. The justice system has largely depended on the current criminal laws, and the urge to create a national anti-lynching law is still firm.

LANDMARK CASES

The Mohammad Akhlaq case of 2015 in Uttar Pradesh and the case of Pehlu Khan of 2017 in Rajasthan showed how cow vigilantism is becoming a reality in India. Akhlaq Case The lynching of a 52-year-old man by a mob, reportedly because he consumed and stored beef, led the nation into a furor and brought the rising cow protection activism to national attention. In the transportation of cattle, the Pehlu Khan case followed a milky farmer killed by self-proclaimed cow protectors. Even video evidence was not sufficient to convict the accused people; despite the obviousness of the video evidence, there were serious loopholes in investigation and prosecution.

These incumbent events were portrayed in a later case in Jharkhand, the Tabrez Ansari Case of 2019, where Ansari was beaten to death by a mob that accused him of riding and stealing a motorcycle and being compelled to chant religious slogans. Later he died of his injuries in police custody. The police had initially registered a case of culpable homicide against Ansari instead of murder, which is highly criticised.

Lastly, the recent circumstances of the Palghar lynching of 2020 in Maharashtra demonstrated further that misinformation can lead to brutal violence yet again; a mob attacked three individuals, two of whom were Hindu ascetics, on account of someone stirring up rumours that they were child-kidnappers.

JUDICIARY RESPONSE TO MOB LYNCHING 

The judiciary has been instrumental in recognising and dealing with mob lynching as a major menace to constitutional order.

Tehseen S. Poonawalla versus the Union of India (2018)

In this landmark case, the supreme court went on to severely attack the issue of mob lynching and installed a set of preventive and compensatory actions. According to the ruling of the court:

• The district magistrate of each district was to be appointed as nodal 

                        officers to put an end to any form of lynching.

• Special fast-track courts to carry out trials of mob lynching cases.

• Victim or their families compensation schemes.

Tough measures towards police officials or the administration of a district when there is negligence.

According to the court, the new normal cannot be mobocracy, and it was the duty of the state to ensure the preservation of constitutional values.

Nevertheless, the progress of these directions has been sluggish and uneven despite this proactive role. Lots of states have failed to act fully upon the advice of the Supreme Court.

EFFECTIVENESS OF THE LEGAL RESPONSE 

Although there are legal provisions to prosecute the culprits in the cases of mob lynching, the general legal reaction to mob lynching as a whole has been more or less ineffective owing to a number of reasons:

1. Absence of Deterrence – Most of the offenders do their crimes with impunity since they are sure that nobody can stop them as they have political patronage or support of the public.

2. Police Machinery Breakdowns – Policemen either fear or are biased against responding to the situation of lynching or are politically compelled to ignore or do not bother to look into the issue closely.

3. Slow Justice – Increased delays in trials and convictions all lead to a culture of impunity. Witnesses become hostile usually when they are threatened or not being given shelter.

4. Poor Compensation and Rehabilitation – The state hardly provides any help in time or in the required proportions to the victims or their families.

5. No Centralised Data – There exists no centralised data source on the    occurrence of incidents of lynching, owing to which it is extensively hard to gauge the extent and magnitude of the problem.

CHALLENGES IN THE LEGAL RESPONSE 

However, due to the failure of the legal response to mob lynching, judicial activism, or even popular indignation, many structural or systemic problems still persist in the way of effective legal response:

1. Law ambiguity

Mob lynching has no exact legal definition. These crimes are complicated to prosecute without a distinct and distinguishable offence. Prosecutors and judges have to use the general provisions of criminal law, those that often miss that lynching is an organised and communal phenomenon.

2. Polarization of Community and Politics

The causes of many lynchings are based on hatred of the community or ideological causes. When the politics are involved in the acts of provoking or protecting the mobs, then law enforcement gets its real setback. Such acts are rarely condemned by politicians as it is because of vote-bank politics.

3. Fake News issues

Social media contributes significantly to rumours that spark lynching. Even though most of the cases are made due to incorrect information on kidnappers of children or meat eating, there is no proper mechanism to check on the content where it gets harmful.

4. No Witness protection

Witnesses are discouraged from testifying in court due to fear of victimisation. India is deficient in a self-governing witness protection system, primarily in communal crimes.

5. The late policy reforms

There are demands to formulate a specific anti-lynching statute by the Union Government, but it has been reluctant to come up with a specific anti-lynching act again and again when the judiciary and civil society continue to urge it to do so.

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The concept of mob lynching ought to be managed using a multi-pronged approach. Some of the important recommendations are as follows:

1. Passage of a National Anti-Lynching Legislation

One should enact legislation that defines mob lynching and criminalises the various aspects of it and prescribes stern punishment. The following should be covered under the law:

• Mob lynching, incitement of, and becoming their participant and                 facilitator.

• Neglect of duty of officeholders.

• Victims protection and pay.

• Special courts and speedy trials are provided.

2. Supreme Court Guidelines implementation

States have to follow the sensibilities of what is instructed in the Tehseen Poonawalla judgement. Special courts, special officers and victim compensation should be institutionalised.

3. Regulation of the Social Media

In collaboration with other communication technologies such as WhatsApp, Facebook and Twitter, the government should establish mechanisms of real-time fake news tracking and reporting which may lead to violence.

4. The Awareness and Community Policing

Sensitisation should be created in such areas or places where rumours are spread so that communal harmony should be established. Police ought to liaise with the local communities to establish faith and intelligence.

5. Police Reforms

The police have to be sensitised and trained on how to deal with mob cases and communal tensions in a level playing field. Officers that do not avert lynching should be dealt with.

6. Protective measures schemes

This should be done by enacting a strong and binding witness protection law that will protect the interests of those who will come to give testimony on the lynching issues.

7. Accountability of the Public Officials

They should hold public officials criminally and administratively liable when they do not fulfil their role of lynching prevention. These are suspension, departmental inquiry, and criminal prosecution in case it is necessary.

CONCLUSION 

Lynching, really, is not solely a law and order issue but a major threat to the constitutional values of India, the social integrity of India, and the ethos of its democratic polity. The increased cases of mob violence question the fundamental idea that all people are innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.

In spite of the judiciary interventions several times, there is still a lack of special legislation, political intentions, and other effective enforcement tools that still encourage the perpetrators under the current circumstances. The legal system that is available has been shown to be inadequate in dealing with the seriousness of mob lynching even though it is enforceable in law theory.

India should take strong steps. This involves the formulation of strict legislation, building strong institutions, creating sensitivities in the society, and the accountability of the mobs and the authorities alike. Then only we can have the real rule of law and can deliver justice to the victims of mob lynching.

REFERENCES 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Bar Council of India does not permit advertisement or solicitation by advocates in any form or manner.

By accessing this website, you confirm that you are seeking information about Legal Counsellia of your own accord and that no solicitation, advertisement, or inducement has been made by Legal Counsellia or any of its members.

The content on this website is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Accessing this website does not create an advocate–client relationship.

Legal Counsellia shall not be liable for any action taken based on the information provided on this website.

Proceed