In impasse in wrestlers’ case, the loser is the rule of law
weakening of the rule of law, mainly on two counts:
- first, a trust deficit in the colonial model of the rule of law,
- and second, a faith-oriented majoritarian re-imagination of laws that locate their essence in the divine providence.
The malaise of such weakening is best exemplified by the case of the Indian medal-winning wrestlers
and their complaints of alleged sexual harassment, where there has been no resolution even after their long sit-in protest in the national capital.
The airing of complaints
sexual advances and grave indignities during their training
For almost a decade now, women trainee wrestlers — this also includes award-winning sportspersons —
have faced and put up with alleged sexual advances and grave indignities during their training.
Dharna pradarshan
In January 2023, some of the wrestlers began their sit-in/dharna at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi.
Despite the Sports Ministry referring the batch of complaints to an oversight committee, there was no concrete and satisfactory outcome.
Further
there was more public support and the survivors also approached the Supreme Court of India,
where the Chief Justice of India passed orders relating to the registration of the First Information Report (FIR)
under the relevant laws and providing security to the wrestlers.
the Delhi Police registered two FIRs:
the first, under Sections 354, 354A, 354D and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and the
second, under the provisions of the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) Act in connection with the minor wrestler’s allegations.
With the registration of the two FIRs for the first time, the sexual harassment complaints came into the domain of criminal justice, making them the subject of police investigation as well as judicial oversight.
The campaign of vilification even went to the extent of critiquing की समीक्षा the very basis of the POCSO Act.
Meeting with Amit sah and anurag Singh thakur
1 Growing support for the wrestler’s cause and increasing social visibility of the issue pushed the Union Home Minister
2 to try and resolve it politically by having a closed door meeting with the representatives of the protesting wrestlers in June,
3 followed by a more exhaustive meeting with the Sports Minister;
4 this also included ‘advising’ the protesting wrestlers who hold regular jobs to resume work.
5 As a sequel to the talks and assured relief, the sit-in ended, with the wrestlers saying their fight would now continue in court.
Slothful आलस and selective investigation
दिल्ली पुलिस किन कानूनों से बाध्य है कार्यवाही करने के लिए
In starting dharna
the police could have acted
1 as in Section 156(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), i.e.,
“Any officer in charge of a police station may, without the order of a Magistrate,
investigate any cognizable case which a Court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of such station
would have power to inquire into or try under the provisions of Chapter XIII”, like the Magistrate under Section 190(c) of the Cr.P.C.
2 The Delhi Police is also under legal obligation, under Section 166A(c) in the amended Penal Code of 2013,
as in the amendment to the Penal Code, which makes the ‘non-recording’ of information about sexual offences an offence punishable up to two years imprisonment.
Therefore, when the Solicitor General advised the Supreme Court on May 28 that the FIRs would be registered ‘if your Lordships so directs’ and the Court complied with the wish, both displayed unusual deference to the Delhi Police. The Delhi Police would have been better reminded of their obligation to follow the mandatory FIR registration, as laid down in the ruling in Lalita Kumari (2013).
इसलिए, जब सॉलिसिटर जनरल ने 28 मई को सुप्रीम कोर्ट को सलाह दी कि 'यदि आपका आदेश हो तो' एफआईआर दर्ज की जाएंगी और कोर्ट ने उनकी इच्छा का पालन किया, तो दोनों ने दिल्ली पुलिस के प्रति असामान्य सम्मान प्रदर्शित किया।
दिल्ली पुलिस को अनिवार्य एफआईआर पंजीकरण का पालन करने के अपने दायित्व की याद दिलाना बेहतर होता, जैसा कि ललिता कुमारी (2013) मामले में फैसले में बताया गया है।
दिल्ली पुलिस ने अपराध की जांच में अपना समय लिया है, जिसमें शिकायतकर्ताओं की साख पर ध्यान केंद्रित किया गया है और जहां तक आरोपी व्यक्तियों का संबंध है, केवल सरसरी तथ्य जुटाए गए हैं।
POCSO अधिनियम के तहत आने वाली एक एफआईआर के बावजूद, मुख्य आरोपी व्यक्ति से पूछताछ नहीं की गई है या उस पर किसी भी तरह का प्रतिबंध नहीं लगाया गया है, यहां तक कि वह गवाहों पर दबाव बनाने और डराने-धमकाने के प्रयास में सोशल मीडिया पर बदनामी का अभियान जारी रखे हुए है।.
over 40 days of investigation, the police filed its long report in two parts:
a charge sheet relating to different sexual offences against the adult wrestlers,
and a closure application (over 500 pages long) in connection with the POCSO Act offence.
The closure application relied on an extra-legal withdrawal application by the minor, who is alleged to have made the first complaint, including a statement under Section 164 in a state of anger or dispiritedness.निराशा
Should the police have total supremacy in matters of the line of investigation, time taken and the final outcome of investigation?
The rule of law course correction
It looks that the legal action at police level has been designed to be slow and selective and overly deferential to the main accused person.
judicial intervention in investigation may arise from an application by the complainant directly under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. or on a writ petition before the High Court.
In addition, the appellate courts (High Courts and the Supreme Court of India) enjoy powers to take suo motu cognisance and call for an action taken report or direct the lower court to monitor the investigation.
The Supreme Court, in Sakiri Vasu vs State of U.P. (2008)
has already show the magistracy with implied/inherent powers to monitor an investigation in the event of any abuse of powers.
Sadly, in the case before us, the survivors have, by and large, had a raw deal.
Neither the Delhi police nor the judiciary appear to have considered it worthwhile to stem the rot.
They have been protesting in the open — at the site and then on the streets of Delhi — for months now.
But administrative relief and judicial support seem far.
For the political means in , the ‘delay’
may be part of a ‘smart’ strategy to let the complaints lapse with time, even as it is convenient to blame the ‘failing colonial model’ of the rule of law.
Summary
The need is to stand up and resort to course correction to save the soul of the rule of law.
We are not alone in such a fight to save the rule of law, as in many other democracies across the world, the rule of law confronts similar threats. This appears to be why the Stockholm Criminology Symposium (June 2023), focused on the theme of ‘principled and equitable law enforcement’.
There is a weakening of the rule of law in India, best exemplified by the impasse in the wrestlers’ sexual harassment complaint and the feeble administrative, judicial and political attempts to ensure justice
Comments
Post a Comment