Irfan Engineer and Vineeth Srivatsava Bhagyanagar
CSSS would be studying communal violence in Meerut
(UP). Towards that, the authors visited Meerut on 13th October 2021
and talked to some lawyers representing the survivors of the communal violence
to understand the situation. We would be visiting again to talk to the
survivors and various stakeholders and reporting. This is the first in the
series – editor.
According to answer given by Ministry of Home affairs
in parliament in response to question about the rise in the incidents of
communal violence in India, the year 2017 saw 822 incidents of communal
violence. Uttar Pradesh is at the top in the table accounting 44 deaths and 540
injuries only in 2017. Apart from Uttar Pradesh, states like Rajasthan,
Jharkhand and Bihar also witnessed increase in communal violence in 2017. The
actual number of incidents and fatalities would be much higher since many cases
go unreported.
Background of Meerut:
Situated between rivers Ganga and Yamuna, Meerut is a
busy trade centre of Western Uttar Pradesh, about 70 kms from Delhi and falling
within the National Capital Region. According to the 2011 census, the Meerut
Urban Agglomeration (Meerut UA) has a population of around 1.42
million, with the municipality contributing roughly 1.31 million of
it. The Meerut Urban Agglomeration consists of area falling under Meerut
Municipal Corporation, Meerut Cantonment Board and 4 census towns of
Sindhawali, Amehra Adipur, Aminagar and Mohiuddinpur (Wikipedia (a), 2021). Meerut
city which had a population of over five lakhs in 1984, Hindus were 51 percent
and Muslims were about 49 percent (Engineer, 1984, p. 271).
There are five assembly constituencies under the
Meerut Lok Sabha constituency (Wikipedia, 2021). The
Indian National Congress was first defeated in the year 1967 by Samyukta
Socialist Party candidate and since 1967, Congress could win only 4 times. Amar
Pal of the BJP represented the constituency from 1994 to 1999, winning the Lok
Sabha elections thrice during the period. Avtar Singh Bhadana of Congress,
belonging to Gujjar caste, represented the Constituency from 1999 to 2004.
Bhadana has also represented BJP from the Meerapur Assembly Constituency.
Mohammed Shahid Akhlaq of BSP represented the constituency from 2004 to 2009.
Since 2009, Rajendra Agarwal of the BJP has been representing the constituency
by winning elections in 2009, 2014 and 219. The runner up in 2019 was Haji
Yaqoob Qureshi of BSP, who lost by less than 5,000 votes. If the votes polled
by the second runner up is added, BJP would have lost the seat. Even in the
2014 general elections, if the votes polled by the three Muslim candidates
belonging to BSP, SP and INC are added, the BJP candidate would have lost from
the constituency. The Meerut Lok Sabha constituency has five Vidhan Sabha
segments and four of them elected the BJP and in the 5th, Samajwadi
Party candidate Haji Rafiq Ansari was elected. From the foregoing, it can be
concluded that in order to win elections from Meerut Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabha
constituencies, the BJP has to politically mobilize the Hindus and at the same
time divide the Muslim votes. The BSP poses a potential threat to the BJP as it
has the potential to mobilize the Dalit votes as well as Muslim votes. During
the 1982 communal riots, in which 90 Muslims and 10 Hindus died, the BJP was
making a conscious attempt to woo the Dalits (Engineer, 2004, p. 63). In
1982, the MP as well as MLA from Meerut were Muslims – Mohsina Kidwai and
Manzoor Ahmad – both belonging to the Congress, which had it social base among
the Muslims as well as Dalits. The BJP actively wooed the Dalits from Valmiki
community, and their ex-MLA Mohanlal Kapoor would participate in the puja of
the community from a distance. In the 1982 communal riot, Dalits were
successfully mobilised to attack the Muslims through rumours about an imminent
attack from Muslims, which caused insecurity and apprehension among them, as
well as by offering financial and material incentives.
The city has its importance in as much as the 1857
rebellion commenced off from the city. Meerut city is one of the largest
producers of sports goods and musical instruments in India. The traditional
industries in the Meerut city are handloom and scissors. Muslims mostly worked
as weavers and some even owned looms. The cloth produced was sold to the Hindu
traders. Muslims are also engaged in production of scissors and brass bands, in
which they enjoyed a monopoly. While most Muslims in Meerut are poor, many of
those engaged in brass band manufacturing units are prosperous. Engineer (1984, p. 272) noted that all the ingredients
that resulted in communal riots were present in Meerut – 1) middle-sized town,
2) high proportion of Muslims, more than 30%, 3) a well-to-do section amongst
the Muslims that could be potential competitors of Hindu traders, 4) political
competition between the elite. The 1982 riots lasted for more than four weeks.
According to 2011 census, Meerut district population
stands at about thirty-four lakhs. Of which, Hindus account for 63.40 per cent
of the population and Muslims about 34.43 per cent. People practising Christianity,
Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism and other faiths are less than two per cent of the
total population of the district. Meerut has been a site of endemic Hindu-Muslim
riots (Brass 2004). Some of the serious riots which resulted in death occurred
in 1939 and 1946 pre independence and 1961, 1968, 1973, 1982, 1986, 1987, 1989,
1990 and 1991 post-independence. Ashutosh Varshney and Steven I. Wilkinson
(1996) note that Meerut ranks very high in the list of ‘riot prone towns’ in
India during the period of 1960-1993. 17 people were killed in the 1968 riots
that were triggered by attack on a political meeting of Muslims by the Hindus (Engineer, 2004, p. 38). The
1973 riots started over an argument between a Hindu shopkeeper and his Muslim
client. Nine persons died and 40 persons were injured in that riot (Engineer, 2004, p. 45). The
1982 riots were major riots in which 100 persons were killed (90 Muslims and 10
Hindus); 53 Hindus and 27 Muslims were injured. The PAC bullets killed 42 of
the 90. Lot of ammunition, including 10 country made revolvers, 28 bombs, 27
litres of acid, 16 kg of potash and 150 kg of other materials to make bombs was
recovered. This shows the involvement of habitual offenders and professional
killers; as also pre-planned nature of the riots. The habitual offenders were
seeking political roles and respectability by participating in riots (Engineer, 1984, p. 272). The
1982 riots were triggered off by Temple-Mazaar controversy – a mini Ayodhya
like situation. The political and religious elite of both the communities were
claiming a disputed structure which the administration had locked. VHP was
mobilizing the Hindu community around the demand to open the lock and allow
them to worship.
The 1987 communal riots in Meerut were even more
heinous and fatal. Officially, 117 persons were killed and 159 injured, 623
houses, 344 shops and 14 factories were looted and burnt between 19th
and 23rd May. However, isolated incidents of killings continued until
15th June. On 10th June, 11 Muslim passengers were pulled
out from buses in Meerut and killed. 68 persons were killed in Maliyana by the
PAC and 40 persons were shot dead near Moradnagar Ganga Canal by PAC, all
Muslims (Engineer, 1989, p. 327). In the
1989 riot, one person was stabbed and three were injured.
Although after 2014 there have been no Hindu-Muslim
riots, the nature of violence has taken a new turn while the traces of its
previous form are still present. Although riots still occur in India, there has
been a shift in nature of communal violence after the electoral victory of BJP
in general election in 2014 and the subsequent state election in Uttar Pradesh
in 2017. Lynchings and other forms of mob violence targeting vulnerable
groups like Muslims, Christians, Dalits, and Adivasis over cultural issues of
cow slaughter or beef consumption, inter-faith relationships, and child lifting have seen
an upsurge in recent years. The incidents of lynching and vigilantism were recorded
in high number in Uttar Pradesh.
During our visit, we met lawyers representing the
survivors of communal violence in various fora to seek justice. We talked to
Adv. Sanjay Jackson, Adv. Iqbal Ahmad and Adv. Liaqat Ali Khan. Talking to them
we got a preliminary impression that rather than large scale cyclic occurrence
as described above, communal violence was now scattered, all pervasive and
everyday occurrence. A band of aggressive Hindu extremists, apparently enjoying
political patronage from highest authorities in the state and the local police,
fearlessly operated targeting members of minority community using coercion and
violence. They had scant respect for law and propriety. Minorities were not
their only victims. Hanging saffron scarf round their neck, they freely
violated traffic laws, civic laws, and muscled their way around controlling the
streets and social environment. They could enter any minority home, dictate
them around, accuse them of all kind of wrongdoings, beat them up and call
police to arrest them and charge them with false cases. The police would
oblige. They disrupted prayer meetings in Christian households and private
gatherings accusing them to be meetings for religious conversions. The Muslims
could be accused of “love jihad”, cow-slaughter etc. Their hapless victims
would plead their innocence with the police and request them to take their complaint
instead, but to no avail. In fact, that intimidating environment prevailed in
the Bar as well. The chamber of the advocates we were talking to would be
crowded with clients as they worked selflessly for justice to minority victims.
The office bearers of the bar would taunt them and made them vacate the bigger
chamber and took away half their space.
Advocates narrated us various incidents that occurred
over time in Meerut. For example, on the eve of Janmashtami this year, in a
Hindu colony, a young Muslim man, Afzal, and his family were attacked for
‘enjoying’ on Hindu religious festival. However, advocates elaborated the
reason- that Afzal’s better sound system which he lent to his Hindu neighbour
hurt the feelings of the other Hindu neighbour and was attacked for this. We
could not verify the details of the incident during our visit and hope to probe
further on the incident in our future visits. We share below details of one of
the incidents narrated to us by the advocates to map the extent of attacks on
freedom of religion or belief in everyday lives in Uttar Pradesh and nexus
between right-wing organisations like Bajrang Dal and the state institutions
like police.
Incident details:
Jatin Joseph and Shirish Shinde belong to “Jehovah’s Witnesses”,
a minority Christian religion. On 20th September 2017, Jatin
and Shirish visited residents of Vikas enclave, Rohta Road, around
10:00 AM to share good news from the Holy scriptures to those people who were interested
in listening. Sharing good news from the Holy scripture forms the essential
practice of their faith. Jatin and Shirish went to the house of Pawan Gupta,
who happens to be member of RSS around 10:40 AM as they were both invited
inside the house. During the discussion, Gupta suddenly grabbed the mobile and
iPad of Jatin and Shirish. After some time, they were held captive in his house
forcefully for more than an hour and were beaten with a belt on the allegation
that they both were trying to forcefully convert them to Christianity. Gupta
alleged that Jatin and Shirish asked him to follow Jesus and
connect them to others in the locality for the same. Upon asking what the
benefit was to Gupta, they allegedly told him that he would receive an amount
of five lakh rupees if five meetings could be conducted at Gupta’s residence.
He claimed that they showed him the video clips and pictures about Christianity
on their iPad. On orders of his father, Gupta’s son called members
of Bajrang Dal and Rashtroday to handle the situation. Both Jatin and Shirish
were brutally beaten with sticks, and their iPad was snatched, and data was shared
from the device without their consent. They tried to suffocate Jatin by
strangulating him.
Only around 12:45 PM, Jatin and Shirish were taken to
Kankerkhera police station, handed over to the police by Pawan Gupta and the
mob that had gathered at his house. They reported to police that the two were
involved in forceful conversion. Pawan Gupta made a formal complaint against
Jatin and Shirish under IPC 295A, claiming that they tried to deliberately
outrage and insult their religious beliefs. Gupta notes in his FIR that he
called his ‘friends’ when he realised that Jatin and Shirish were trying to
convert him to Christianity. Further, the FIR does not mention anything about
the assault that his ‘friends’ perpetrated between 10:45 AM to 12:45 PM. Jatin and
Shirish pleaded with Mr. Lokesh Kumar, police officer present in the Kankerkhera
police station, to register their complaint about the assault on them by Gupta
and his ‘friends’ including Balraj Doongar, member of Bajrang Dal and Dushyant
Rohta. When Jatin and Shirish asked for medical treatment
because of the bruises they had to suffer, police not only refused to do so but
also detained them illegally in the lock-up room till the next day. They were
taken for medical check-up the next day handcuffed to each other. A constable
was holding a long chain tied to the handcuffs. When the medical examination,
conducted at the PL Sharma District hospital, Meerut, at 12 PM on 21st
September, proved that Jatin and Shirish suffered injuries on chest, back, face
and hands. The advocates representing the victims also noted that the Bajrang
Dal members even tried to interfere in the medical examination process.
Vigilantism as a form of domination:
Earlier scholars noted that riots in India are
properly planned and executed for electoral benefits. Gareth Nellis, Micheal
Weaver, and Steven Rosenzweig have earlier elaborated how riots profited the
BJP electorally. After BJP came to power in 2014, nature of violence has
shifted from riots to small scale vigilantism that not only keeps check on the
marginalised communities from immediate vicinity but also spreads fear across
the nation. Vigilantes aim to maintain the domination in public sphere by
dictating terms of the social conduct. On one hand, vigilantism amounts to
physical coercion on the victim’s body. On the other hand, it often results in
self-disciplining of people over their conduct and remind them of their
ascribed status in public sphere. Vigilantes enjoy patronage of political power
that gives them impunity from the actions they commit. Perhaps, this explains
why incidents of mob lynching relating to cow slaughter or beef consumption and
inter-faith relationships is higher in states ruled by BJP. In fact, in the
Jatin and Shirish’s incident discussed above, Jehovah’s witnesses, religion to
which the victims belong, are principally against forceful conversion. They
were never accused of forceful conversion before. However, the facts did not
matter to the vigilantes who were pre-determined in their action. Further, it
is interesting to note that while Gupta claims that Jatin and Shirish happen to
induce him to convert to Christianity, but an upper caste Hindu family in good
locality will not be ideal household for that. It appears that Jatin and
Shirish were, in fact, trapped by Gupta who is well connected not only to
Bajrang Dal and Rashtroday but also to the police who refused to register even
a complaint against him when asked by the victims. Further, the ecosystem
created by the BJP for vigilantes to thrive gave Gupta and his ‘friends’ to not
only attack but hand them over to police and charge them with false
allegations.
Police and vigilante nexus:
The motto of Uttar Pradesh police- “Surakhsa aapki,
Sankalp hamara” translates to “Your protection, Our Pledge”. However,
the Police in the BJP led government in Uttar Pradesh has resorted to
partiality when dealing with cases related to mob violence. It appears that the
police’s protection is not equal to all citizens and some sections of the
society enjoy the right to dominate and silence the minorities. We were
repeatedly told that Bajrang Dal leaders and members often get away with their
actions unchallenged. It was found in our investigation that police played a
dual role in such instances. On the one hand, the police often collaborated
with the right-wing organisations in such incidents. In the incident mentioned
above, police not only failed to register the oral and written complaint of
Jatin and Shirish against Pawan Gupta, Balraj Doongar and Dushyant Rohta but
also subjected victims to inhumane conditions by illegally arresting them and
subsequently parading them handcuffed as criminals. There was no probe into the
injuries sustained by the victims at the residence of Pawan Gupta. Police also
shamefully claimed that they are arresting the victims for their own ‘safety’.
On the other hand, there seems to be pressure on the police machinery from the
state to book more cases relating to conversion and cow vigilantism. The state
apparently incentivized booking of higher number of cases of “religious
conversions” and “cow slaughter” targeting Muslims and Christians. The
vigilante-police nexus thus worked to the advantage of both. Advocates
representing Jatin and Shirish mentioned to us that the police also complained
of pressure from the government when they demanded released of the victims.
Conclusion:
The above incident presents us the case of normalisation
of vigilante behaviour and impunity they enjoy. The presence and misuse or of
laws on marginalised communities seem to one of the factors that gives the
moral right to the vigilantes in coercive practices. Further, the institution
of police failed to not only protect the victims who are assaulted but they are
also legally punished for offences they did not perpetrate.
References:
Brass,
Paul R (2004), “Development of an Institutional Riot System in Meerut City,
1961 to 1982”, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 39, issue 44, pp.
4839-4848.
Engineer,
A. A. (1984). An Analytical Study of the Meerut Riot. In A. A. Engineer, Communal
Riots in Post-Independence India (pp. 271-280). Hyderabad: Sangam Books.
Engineer,
A. A. (1989). Communalism and Communal Violence in India: An Analytical
Approach to Hindu-Muslim Conflict. Delhi: Ajanta Publications (India).
Engineer,
A. A. (2004). Commual Riots After Independence: A Comprehensive Account.
Delhi: Shipra Publications.
Varshney,
Ashutosh and Wilkinson, Steven I (1996), Hindu-Muslim riots 1960-93: New
Findings, Possible Remedies, Rajiv Gandhi Institute for Contemporary
Studies, New Delhi, pp. 27
Wikipedia
(a). (2021, October 17). Meerut. Retrieved October 21, 2021, from
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meerut
Wikipedia.
(2021, July 10). Meerut (Lok Sabha Constituency). Retrieved October 21,
2021, from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meerut_(Lok_Sabha_constituency)
No comments:
Post a Comment