Why in News?

• The SC has asked the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and the governments of Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan, Bihar, MP and Haryana an explanation for their “consistent failure” to act against lynching and mob violence committed on Muslims by cow vigilantes.
• This is in response to a petition filed by the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW), highlighting that the “rampant rise” in lynchings violates constitutional guarantees provided under following articles of the Constitution–
  • Articles 14 (equality before the law),
  • Article 15 (religious non-discrimination) and
  • Article 21 (right to life)

What’s in Today’s Article?

• What is Mob Lynching (SC’s Observations, Tehseen Poonawala Case, etc.)
• 7 Remedial Directions Given by the SC
• Contempt Petition against the Centre and States

What is Mob Lynching?

• It is when common people take the law into their own hands and in an attempt to achieve their distorted version of justice, violate the basic human rights of others by killing them and neglecting due process.
• It constitutes a grand failure on part of the State which must prevent the violation thereof and must further protect the fundamental rights (Article 14, 15 and 21) guaranteed to its citizens under the Constitution.
• Its causes include intolerance, biases and vigilantism in the society; lack of speedy justice; inefficiency of police administration etc.
• In India, communal based violence, Cow-related mob lynching, suspicion of child lifting, theft cases, etc., are some of the types of mob lynching.

What has the Supreme Court Observed?

• It issued notice to the MHA and the police chiefs of the six States to explain the “alarming rise” in lynchings despite a SC judgment in Tehseen Poonawala versus Union of India in 2018.
• Vigilantism cannot become the “new normal” and no citizen can assault the human dignity of another.
• No right is higher in a secular, pluralistic and multiculturalist social order than the right to live with dignity and to be treated with humaneness.

What was Tehseen Poonawala Judgment?

• The judgment held that it was the “sacrosanct duty” of the state to protect the lives of its citizens.
• It said spiraling incidents of lynching, and the gruesome visuals aired through social media have compelled the court to reflect on whether the populace has lost the values of tolerance to sustain a diverse culture.
• Bystander apathy, numbness of the mute spectators, the inertia of the law enforcing machinery and grandstanding of the incident by the perpetrators of the crimes (including social media), aggravates the entire problem.
• The authorities of the States have the “principal obligation” to see that vigilantism, be it cow vigilantism or any other, does not take place.
• The judgment warned that vigilantes usher in anarchy, chaos, disorder and eventually there is an emergence of a violent society. Hence, vigilantism cannot be given room to take shape.

7 Remedial Directions Given by the SC:

• Appointment of a designated nodal officer: Not below the rank of Superintendent of Police for taking measures to prevent prejudice-motivated crimes like mob violence and lynching.
• The immediate lodging of an FIR: If an incident of lynching or mob violence comes to the notice of the local police.
• Duty of the Station House Officer: Who has registered the FIR to inform the nodal officer in the district, who in turn should ensure that the families of the victims are spared of any further harassment.
• The investigation of the crime should be personally monitored: By the nodal officer and the investigation and chargesheet are filed within the stipulated period in law.
• There should be a scheme to compensate victims.
• Any failure to comply with the court’s directions: By a police or district administration officer would be considered as an act of deliberate negligence and/or misconduct.
• States should take disciplinary action: Against their officials if they did not did not prevent an incident of mob lynching, despite having prior knowledge of it.

Contempt Petition against the Centre and States:

• The Centre and States are facing a separate contempt petition in the SC for non-compliance with the Tehseen Poonawala judgment.
• In that case, the SC had directed the State governments to file a status report giving year wise data from 2018 of the -
  • Number of complaints received.
  • FIRs registered and chargesheets filed in lynching cases.
  • Steps/measures, preventive and remedial, taken by the State governments.
• The court directed the Centre to file an affidavit stating the outcome of a proposed meeting between the MHA and the department heads of the State governments about the compliance of the Tehseen Poonawala judgment.