×
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Jignesh Mevani case: Absurdity and Assam Police

Assam Police should realise it has a constitutional duty to fulfil, that it should apply constitutional reason and not implement the will of the rulers
Last Updated 04 May 2022, 09:23 IST

The Gauhati High Court has rushed to rescue the honour of the Assam Police, which was besmirched by an order of the Barpeta District and Sessions Judge Aparesh Chakravarty. This was the order granting bail to Jignesh Mevani, who was arrested for 'assaulting' a policewoman and 'outraging' her modesty, which he did while in police custody if we are to believe the Barpeta police. Judge Chakravarty, while freeing Mevani, had made harsh comments condemning the action of the Assam Police and requested the High Court to ensure its reform.

Judge Chakravarty found the allegation against Jignesh so absurd that he wrote in his order that "no sane person will ever try to outrage the modesty of a lady police officer in the presence of two male police officers, and there is nothing in the record to hold that the accused… is an insane person." The court noted that that the case was "manufactured for the purpose of keeping the accused in detention for a longer period, abusing the process of the court and the law."

It did not need a judicial mind to see what was being done to Mevani. First, he was arrested in an extraordinary operation by the Assam Police, Kokarjhar police, to be precise. It took cognisance of a complaint by a local leader against Mevani for having made a statement on the eve of the visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Gujarat. Mevani issued an appeal which was sarcastic. Calling Modi a "Godse devotee", he reminded him that he was a builder of the Mahatma Mandir in Gujarat and it was his duty, as the prime minister, to appeal for peace in the parts of Gujarat which were hit by communal violence.

How could this tweet create disharmony in society? How on earth could it make communities enemies or each other? It was definitely sarcastic; one can even say that it sought to defame Modi by associating him with Godse, but how could it lead to a breach of peace in Assam, 2500 kilometres away from Gujarat from where Jignesh was making this appeal? The politician who made these allegations in his complaint was free to do so. But before taking cognisance of it and finding the charges so serious as to warrant immediate arrest of Jignesh, the Assam Police was expected to ask these questions. It is supposed to be a force with a reasonable mind.

Did the Assam Police apply reason while dealing with this complaint? It has to talk honestly. Do police anywhere in India immediately accept complaints and covert them into FIRs? We all know that it makes all efforts to dissuade people from filing FIRs. In many cases, it threatens the complainants themselves that they will have to go through difficulties if their complaint were to be registered. This is an experience all Indians share. The people of Assam cannot be different. But in this case, the Kokarajhar police acted with alacrity.

Its team made a road journey to Guwahati, which usually takes nearly four hours. From there, it flew to Bengaluru, and from there it made its journey to Ahmedabad. Then it again travelled by road to Badgaon, which is the constituency Mevani represents in the Gujarat Assembly. It raided the offices of Mevani, harassed his colleagues, seized the mobile phones of their parents, and seized the computers belonging to Mevani. It then arrested him. The police do not even feel the need to show the FIR under which his arrest was being made. It does not even follow the protocol of informing the speaker of the Assembly before taking this action. It is in such a tearing hurry to bring Mevani to Assam that his arrest is made in the night, and he is flown to Assam the very next morning.

Is Mevani wrong when he claims that the tickets must have been booked before the filing of the FIR for the Assam police to have achieved their feat of bringing him to Assam in such a record time?

When Mevani gets bail in this case, as the charges are found frivolous by a local court and not serious enough to require his detention, the Assam Police cannot bear the idea of him walking free. It came up with a brilliant idea. This time it would be difficult to brush aside the charges. A lady police officer alleged that she was abused and assaulted by Mevani when accompanying him in the police vehicle in Assam.

Again, is Mevani wrong when he asked that it was a well thought out plan to make a ground for another criminal case as the police itself was not sure if the court would find the first FIR serious enough to keep him in jail. Mevani asked why a lady police officer was seated near him when other male police officers were present? Was it to make the case look credible? Could he have pushed or assaulted her when male police officers surrounded him in the vehicle?

The court, too, applied common sense and rejected the claim in the FIR. It said that only an insane man could do what the policewoman blames Jignesh for having done. It had strong words for the accusation made by the police: "It was manufactured for the purpose of keeping the accused in detention for a longer period, abusing the process of the court and the law." "No sane person will ever try to outrage the modesty of a lady police officer in the presence of two male police officers and there is nothing in the record to hold that the accused… is an insane person."

Was this an exception? How does the Assam Police even think of doing it? The court saw it as part of a pattern. When the Mevani case was being discussed, a death went unnoticed. Abdul Ahad Chaudhary, an alleged coal mafia man, was killed in an encounter in Lakhinagar, Assam. The police claimed he fled from their custody while being taken for medical examination after his arrest in Karimganj. Since he was seen as a criminal, his death did not arouse disquiet among people. This death or killing was only one of those nearly 50 encounter killings which have taken place after the new government led by Himanta Biswa Sarma assumed power. He gave orders to shoot criminals who tried to flee. According to government sources, more than 50 encounter killings have taken place in Assam till April 2022. Hundreds have been shot. All while fleeing from the police custody! Human rights organisations have voiced their concern, but they have been dismissed. They have been blamed for speaking for the criminals. As if the accused, who have not even been convicted, lose all their rights! But this is what the Assam government and its police believe.

The court must have it in mind when it observed that the High Court might think of issuing guidelines for "each and every police personnel engaged in law and order duty to wear body cameras, to install CCTV cameras in vehicles while arresting an accused or taking an accused to some place for recoveries of goods or other reasons, and also install CCTV cameras inside all police stations." Can one deny that it is a severe stricture on the Assam police? But can we ignore the concern of the Barpeta court that "converting our hard-earned democracy into a police state is simply unthinkable and if the Assam Police is thinking about the same, the same is perverse thinking."

The memory of these encounter killings made one of our friends fear that the way Assam Police was moving Mevani from one place to another, it might stage an 'encounter' with him. Her fear was not unfounded. For, if Mevani could assault an officer in a car full of police officers, why could he not jump out and try to flee? Which could have given ground for the police to attempt to stop him.

The Barpeta court wants the police to behave in an honourable manner. In a way that its claims are taken seriously. In a manner in which the police could itself be able to speak with its head high. Not with the arrogance of power but with a sense of moral righteousness.

How can it justify the killings in Sipajhar during an eviction drive? Senior police officers found its conduct criminal and called it a Jallianwala Bagh replay. How does it reconcile with the fact that in its presence, its own photographer jumped on the body of a man shot by the police?

The moral of the Assam Police is already compromised. Otherwise, it would not have done with Mevani what it did. The High Court should have taken this opportunity to ask the Assam Police to introspect. Realise that it has a constitutional duty to fulfil, and it is not a mercenary force of the ruling party, that it should apply constitutional reason and not implement the will of the rulers. Only then will it be able to say that its moral is intact.

(The writer teaches at Delhi University)

ADVERTISEMENT
(Published 04 May 2022, 09:23 IST)

Follow us on

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT