TISS report points to anti-Muslim bias of police

June 26, 2012
prisoner

Mumbai, June 26: A report on Muslim prisoners in Maharashtra jails by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) establishes that most of them do not have connections with criminal gangs, and points to an acute bias of the police for arresting them in some cases only because they belong to a particular community.

A Study of the Socio Economic Profile and Rehabilitation Needs of Muslim Community in Prisons in Maharashtra, 2011, by Dr. Vijay Raghavan and Roshni Nair from the Centre for Criminology and Justice School of Social Work, Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), states that 96 per cent of the respondents have not been held under preventive detention charges, thus indicating that they are not viewed as a threat to law and order.

The study which surveyed 339 Muslims, mostly between 18 and 30 years of age, in 15 prisons says this implies that most respondents do not have connections with criminal gangs or have any record which may be a threat to law and order. About 25.4 per cent of those imprisoned don’t have lawyers to represent them in their cases.

The police’s bias against Muslims led to some of the arrests under the erstwhile Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (MCOCA) and even under the Official Secrets Act.

‘Two types of laws’

An agent in textile export, Murtuza, arrested under the Official Secrets Act on charges of spying, says in his interview to the research team: “There are two types of laws in this country. One is for Hindus and the other is for Muslims. The policeman is first a Hindu and then a policeman. The judge is first a Hindu and then a judge and the lawyer is first a Hindu then a lawyer. People who work against the State, indulge in rioting, kill thousands of innocent people, and harass women and children roam free in this country. They are not punished. I am suffering only because I am a Muslim.”

Murtuza strongly feels that the discriminatory attitude is one of the major reasons for his arrest. He says that the police do not have enough evidence against him and yet he remains in prison. Two years have passed and the case is dragging on in court. He misses his court dates because the escort to take him to court is often not available. He has applied for bail thrice, but it has been rejected each time. He also applied for transferring the case to a different judge, but nothing has happened yet.

Poor victimised

Another prisoner Moiz says that “every time he tries to start life afresh, the police arrest him in some false case. They also demand money from criminals and those who can pay are set free. The poor are victimised. The police are very powerful and can do anything.”

Some interviews reflect the deep despair and alienation of the people interviewed. Muneer feels that after the demolition of the Babri Masjid, the rift between Hindus and Muslims has widened. Due to the riots and bomb blasts in 1992-93, the police perception of Muslims has become negative. The police view them as criminal minded. Migrants from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar are viewed with prejudice by the police.

Shoaib expressed his fears about the breakdown of the social fabric if the bias against Muslims continues. “The police have a negative perception of the Muslim community and act with bias. Due to the actions of the police and fundamentalist politics, the perception of Muslims is negative in society. If the situation continues to be like this, the next generation may get into further crime and vested interests could use them. Society’s perception and the negative feelings of hatred have to be reduced. Only then there is hope for a better tomorrow. Otherwise the situation will get worse for individuals, their families and society.”

About 70 per cent of the 3,000 Muslims prisoners in 15 jails were under trials and 30 per cent were convicted prisoners. What is of concern is that 52.8 per cent are charged with violent crimes mainly murder, attempt to murder, rape, assault and kidnapping. Among the under trials interviewed charge sheets have only been filed in 47.4 per cent of the cases and a mere 3.8 per cent have reached judgement stage, indicating the slow pace of trials. Of those interviewed 75.5 per cent were arrested for the first time and 25.5 per cent are repeat offenders.

The percentage of Muslims in jails is also a high 36 per cent, says Dr. Raghavan, quoting recent official figures. Along with Gujarat and Kerala, Maharashtra is one of the States with the most disproportionate number of Muslims in prisons.

The Sachar Committee report says that in Maharashtra, Muslims account for 10.6 per cent of the general population; yet they comprise 32.4 per cent of the prison population. For those incarcerated on terms of less than a year, the figure rises: 42 per cent of prisoners on short-term sentences in the State are Muslims.

This study was done at the behest of the Maharashtra State Minorities Commission in response to the charge of a disproportionate number of Muslims in jail. It makes a slew of recommendations relating to rehabilitation and correctional programmes, and the need for steps to sensitise the police and prison administration.

Last month the findings were presented at a meeting with Arif Naseem Khan, State Minister for Minority Affairs.

The Minister accepted most of the recommendations, especially those relating to legal aid, adult education, vocational training, release on probation, and awareness and counselling centres in Muslim areas.

The Additional Chief Secretary of Minority Development will call a high-level inter-departmental meeting soon to work out ways to implement the recommendations.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
March 1,2020

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 26,2020
Bhopal, Jul 26: BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur on Saturday appealed people to recite the Hanuman Chalisa five times a day till August 5, which she believes will rid the world of the coronavirus pandemic.
`Bhoomi pujan’ or the ground-breaking ceremony for the construction of Ram temple at Ayodhya is to take place on August 5.
“Let us all of us together make a spiritual effort to wish people good health and end the coronavirus epidemic.
Recite ‘Hanuman Chalisa’ five times a day at your home from July 25 to August 5,” the Bhopal MP tweeted.
“Conclude this ritual by lighting lamps on August 5 and offering ‘aarti’ to Lord Ram at home,” she added.
She also shared a video on Twitter, in which she said the BJP government in Madhya Pradesh is making efforts to contain the spread of coronavirus by imposing lockdown in Bhopal till August 4.
“Though the lockdown will be over on August 4, this ritual (recitation of the Hanuman Chalisa, a hymn in praise of Lord Hanuman) will end on August 5, when ‘bhoomi pujan’ for Ram temple in Ayodhya will be performed. We will celebrate that day like Diwali,” she added.
“When people... Hindus from across the country recite the ‘Hanuman Chalisa’ in one voice, it will definitely work and we will be free from coronavirus...This is your prayer to Lord Ram,” said Thakur.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 30,2020

Mumbai, Jan 30: Speaking at an event, Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Abu Azmi's son and businessman, Farhan Azmi said that if CM Uddhav Thackeray will build lord Ram's Temple at Ayodhya then he will build Babri Masjid there. He said, "My problem is with Uddhav Thackeray.

I respect him a lot and if in Shiv Sena somebody really deserves respect, then it is no other than Uddhav Thackeray. He never runs a government and I don't think he is running his party correctly.

If being the Chief Minister, Uddhav Thackeray says he is going to Ayodhya on 7th March, I will also go with him. He will build lord Ram's Temple and we will build Babri Masjid."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.