<p class="bodytext">The Uttar Pradesh government’s move to withdraw charges against those accused of lynching Akhlaq Ahmed is a brazen attack on rule of law and justice. He was lynched by a mob in 2015 on the suspicion that he had slaughtered a cow and eaten beef in a village near Dadri in western UP. The government has sought withdrawal of cases against all 18 accused on the grounds that witness statements are inconsistent. In a Gautam Buddha Nagar court, the prosecution has that there is “there is no evidence of previous enmity or rivalry’’ between Akhlaq’s family and the accused, and the cases should be withdrawn ‘’for the larger purpose of restoring social harmony.” The killing of Akhlaq a few months after the first Narendra Modi government assumed office had attracted national attention and triggered an uproar. The incident set the trend for the killings and atrocities committed by cow vigilantes in UP and other states in later years. </p>.<p class="bodytext">The lynching had triggered protests all over the country. Political parties, groups, organisations and individuals, including prominent personalities, had expressed concern over the incident. Many writers and artists had returned the awards and honours they had received from the government in a movement that came to be known as ‘award wapsi’ to protest against the incident and the government’s silence. Some in the Sangh Parivar indirectly defended it, others said it was the work of fringe elements. It took time for the case to move forward. The accused are now out on bail. Charges were formally framed only in 2021, and five of the 25 witnesses have already deposed. There is no sound reason for withdrawal of the cases. During the investigation, the meat kept in Akhlaq’s house was found to be mutton, but the police later claimed that on further examination they found it to be beef. A case was also filed against Akhlaq and his family for keeping beef at home. </p>.Sunshine deficit is a rising problem.<p class="bodytext">The western UP village where the incident occurred, and the area around it, are communally split after the incident. The lynching contributed to increased polarisation, and the spread of hate politics in the country. Rumours about keeping or eating beef and transportation of cows are used as excuses to harass and even kill Muslims. A number of states have made their anti-cow slaughter laws more stringent. Anti-beef and anti-Muslim campaigns have been normalised. The move for withdrawal of the cases should be seen against this background. The withdrawal would mean that no one killed Akhlaq. The real meaning would be that it is no crime to kill a person by calling him a beef-eater.</p>
<p class="bodytext">The Uttar Pradesh government’s move to withdraw charges against those accused of lynching Akhlaq Ahmed is a brazen attack on rule of law and justice. He was lynched by a mob in 2015 on the suspicion that he had slaughtered a cow and eaten beef in a village near Dadri in western UP. The government has sought withdrawal of cases against all 18 accused on the grounds that witness statements are inconsistent. In a Gautam Buddha Nagar court, the prosecution has that there is “there is no evidence of previous enmity or rivalry’’ between Akhlaq’s family and the accused, and the cases should be withdrawn ‘’for the larger purpose of restoring social harmony.” The killing of Akhlaq a few months after the first Narendra Modi government assumed office had attracted national attention and triggered an uproar. The incident set the trend for the killings and atrocities committed by cow vigilantes in UP and other states in later years. </p>.<p class="bodytext">The lynching had triggered protests all over the country. Political parties, groups, organisations and individuals, including prominent personalities, had expressed concern over the incident. Many writers and artists had returned the awards and honours they had received from the government in a movement that came to be known as ‘award wapsi’ to protest against the incident and the government’s silence. Some in the Sangh Parivar indirectly defended it, others said it was the work of fringe elements. It took time for the case to move forward. The accused are now out on bail. Charges were formally framed only in 2021, and five of the 25 witnesses have already deposed. There is no sound reason for withdrawal of the cases. During the investigation, the meat kept in Akhlaq’s house was found to be mutton, but the police later claimed that on further examination they found it to be beef. A case was also filed against Akhlaq and his family for keeping beef at home. </p>.Sunshine deficit is a rising problem.<p class="bodytext">The western UP village where the incident occurred, and the area around it, are communally split after the incident. The lynching contributed to increased polarisation, and the spread of hate politics in the country. Rumours about keeping or eating beef and transportation of cows are used as excuses to harass and even kill Muslims. A number of states have made their anti-cow slaughter laws more stringent. Anti-beef and anti-Muslim campaigns have been normalised. The move for withdrawal of the cases should be seen against this background. The withdrawal would mean that no one killed Akhlaq. The real meaning would be that it is no crime to kill a person by calling him a beef-eater.</p>
