The Congress-led UPA has stooped to a new low in its quest to capture the increasingly uncertain Muslim vote-bank, with a mischievous and deplorable move to set up ‘special courts’ for members of the minority community who have been “falsely implicated” in terror cases. Apart from being a stunning denunciation of police and intelligence forces in the country, this raises some fundamental questions.
To begin with, how does one arrive at a definition of “false implication” until and unless a trial is held, the offence or offences against the accused proved, and the verdict pronounced by a court? To be sure, it is the legal defence of all defence advocates that the accused has/have been ‘falsely implicated,’ but for a Government to set up special courts for ‘false’ cases is to presume that the normal judicial process is either biased against the accused or otherwise incapable of delivering justice.
On March 24, 2013, a major national daily reported that the Union Ministry of Home Affairs has agreed to set up special courts to conduct speedy trials in cases where ‘innocent youth’ of the Muslim community are falsely implicated in terror cases, arrested and jailed.
Minority Affairs Minister K Rahman Khan wrote to Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde with this proposal last month, pointing out that in some cases, young men were incarcerated for 10 to 14 years as under-trials and then finally acquitted by the courts. Shinde has agreed, though as yet no time-frame has been decided for setting up the courts. The proposal includes ‘strong action’ against officers responsible for filing such cases. The Home Ministry will also take up cases of innocents charged with terror cases with the States when they are brought to its notice.
The special courts are a long-standing demand of Muslim organisations such as the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, which have also been demanding compensation for victims and lodging of cases against officers who have falsely implicated them. This has been supported by opposition parties such as the Samajwadi Party, which has a major stake in the Muslim vote-bank. The party’s government in Uttar Pradesh released 400 minority youth from the State’s jails earlier this month.
A sensational case of false accusation pertains to journalist Muthiur Rehman Siddiqui and DRDO scientist Aijaz Ahmed Mirza, who were arrested by the Bangalore Police for involvement in an alleged terror plot seven months ago. On March 5 this year, they were given statutory bail and released after the National Investigation Agency failed to file charges against them.
Rahman Khan proposed that the special courts dispose of cases within a year; compensate and rehabilitate innocent victims, and take action against responsible officers where the court finds the evidence concocted or misrepresented to implicate innocents. While agreeing to special courts, Shinde pointed out that issues of compensation would have to be decided on individual merit, as sometimes acquittal could happen due to lack of sufficient evidence to prove the charges or because of improper investigation. Hence, the matter will be left to the courts.
While it is nobody’s case that innocent persons of any group should be targetted and falsely implicated in terror or other crimes, the setting up special courts for cases against a particular community possibly infringes Article 14 of the Constitution, which ensures ‘Equality before Law and Equal Protection before the Law’, as this benefit is being denied to other citizens.
As an example one may site the case of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and others accused in the Malegaon bomb blasts of 2008, who have been languishing in jail for four and half years, without any serious movement in the case. Worse, the Sadhvi has consistently been refused bail even after being diagnosed with cancer, though bail and parole (including two holidays abroad) were whimsically given to the Italian marines accused of murdering to Indian fishermen off the Kerala coast last year. This magnanimity exploded in the Apex Court’s face when the Italian government said it would not send the men back. It took some desperate diplomacy, including shameful promises, by a seriously embarrassed government to bring the men back.
In the case of Sadhvi Pragya, a look at the prosecution document shows that the main allegation against her is of allegedly providing a scooter to the absconding accused and providing two men to Col. Prasad Shrikant Purohit. Both allegations are ‘disproved’ by the prosecution document itself, as she had no control over her vehicle for over two years prior to the blast. This is amply reflected in the statement of a witness and the Investigating Officer (IO) who records that Ramji was using her two-wheeler for more than two years prior to the blast.
So, does not the chargesheet itself show prima facie that she is being ‘falsely implicated’? Even if she is guilty, even if all the accused are guilty, why is the Maharashtra government not capable of conducting a speedy trial against the Sadhvi, Col. Purohit, Dayanand Pande and others?
If special courts are reserved only for the Muslim community, it is not tantamount to saying that terror has a religion because all terrorists belong to one religion only? Supposing the next demand is that the courts be staffed exclusively by members of one community?
What about persons accused and jailed for being Naxalites? Will they have the right to access the special courts?
Congress is clearly establishing a very dangerous and unwarranted precedent which has the potential to fragment the nation and create serious internal fissures in the judicial fraternity as well. The special courts should be re-designated as fast track courts and mandated to deal exclusively with terror cases, regardless of the ethnic or religious affiliation of the accused.
NitiCentral.com, 25 March 2013
http://www.niticentral.com/2013/03/25/congress-wants-special-courts-for-muslims-58858.html