DO DALITS AND MINORITIES RECEIVE DEATH IN RETURN WHEN THEY SEEK THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS?
Barbaric acts in a civilized society… what is the difference between atrocities committed on Dalits on July 17, 1985 in Karamchedu and the attack on them on June 12, 2002 in Lakshimpet of Vangara Mandal in Srikakulam district. The killers are the different but the killers are the same – caste’s highhandedness and discrimination against the less fortunate citizens of an Indian sate remain the same. Nothing much has changed.
As a result of episode, SC/ST anti atrocities act has been passed in 1989. The act has had little benefit in protecting the Dalits of Lakshimpet in 2002.
The officers who dealt with this cases made a joke of this act and did precious little in the Lakshmipet incident. In fact, June 12 attack was not the first even before when the Revenue Department and the Police Department knew some preplanned attacks made by “KAPU” community heads on Dalits. But no action was initiated. The picket at Lakshmipet was withdrawn with a plea of sending protection forces to cover by election in Narasannapeta. The withdrawal of picket, in fact helped the upper caste people to go and attack the Dalits more easily and with great impunity.
What has happened in reality?
When more than 100 east “KAPU” caste people assembled with axes, sickles and crowbars at 7:00 A.M on June 12, 2012 in Lakshimpet village. Ex Sarpanch, Chittiri Gangulu at once called the police station’s S.I Sudhakar, in Vangara. The S.I informed that he had at the moment only one constable in the P.S and promised to send forces within short time. The distance between Vangara and Lakshmipet was 4 KM and the police forces could reach the village within 15 minutes. But nothing of that kind happened. Gangulu kept on phoning the P.S while the massacre of Dalits was going on. Finally the police reached (but of no use).
Tsunduru Massacre – where are the culprits?
Till to date it remains a puzzle if it is not those twenty one convicts awarded with life term imprisonment by the lower court who are the real criminals? After the A.P. High Court dispensed with the case having no solid proof against the accused, left them scot free. The investigations carried out by the police personals and through probe by the special court with more than 200 upper caste eye witness, the High Court ruled that no adequate ‘proof’ against the accused and hence left them free.
It is not A.P alone, all over India this trend is being followed. In 1996, the Patna High Court freed all the accused as being innocent. Then who killed those lower caste women and children including some Muslims totaling more than twenty. Members of Ranveer Army massacred fifty eight Dalits in Laxmanpur Bathe in Bihar in 1997. All the twenty six accused who were sentenced by the lower court were freed by the Bihar High Court in 2013 as being innocent? In 2014 it became the turn of A.P High Court to give ‘clean chit’ to the accused in ‘Tsunduru Massacre’.
What are the reasons for not proving the Tsunduru Massacre?
The High Court reasoned a lack of clarity in the eye witness at the time of murder to the police, postmortem report being not in order as to the time of murder and impropriety in the analysis of the case events by the lower court as being the main issues for accepting the punishment meted out by the lower court. For want of solid proof and a strong benefit of doubt, the High Court declared the accused as free and released them unscathed.
Was there not really any clarity in the police investigations?
The honorable Judges asked a basic question how did the three bodies remained at the same place while the other five have washed away. The court did not believe the eye witness because all the dead bodies did not wash away nor remained in the same place.
Is delay in report the event a big offence?
The court said that while it is a fundamental duty of all the citizens to report a crime to the police soon after it is committed. Are all the Indian citizens educated to be in the know of criminal procedure code is the point which the court did not, perhaps, count. The fact of the matter was the killer kept at bay all the Dalits from reporting the case to the police by threatening them with the weapons. Fifty of the Upper Caste people who were caught redhandedly with weapons were left free by an S.I at the advice of C.I. the police provided escort the Reddy family children but not to the Dalits who were afraid to go out of their homes for fear of being killed by the Upper Caste people. The court argued why Jaladi Mathaiah did not save his father while he was being killed by the murderers even at the risk of losing his own life. Mathaiah was 15 Yrs old at the time of crime. His eye witness was not considered by the court.
The bone of contention expressed by the High Court before cancelling the lower court’s verdict and setting the accused free was the following:-
The analysis of the witness statements and the corroboration of the events were not done in a right way. This became the opinion of many learned organizations and individuals after the case was finalized and heard.
In our society the caste is overdriving factor and is responsible for violation of civil liberties. It is an unwritten fact that regardless of a strict and very liberal constitution in place, it is the higher caste lords who are ruling the roost. Under these circumstances what signals such justification of crime send to the society. The responsibility of protesting is with us. Let us hope that the Supreme Court shall render relief to the families of the victims. Let us all work together.
Barbaric acts in a civilized society… what is the difference between atrocities committed on Dalits on July 17, 1985 in Karamchedu and the attack on them on June 12, 2002 in Lakshimpet of Vangara Mandal in Srikakulam district. The killers are the different but the killers are the same – caste’s highhandedness and discrimination against the less fortunate citizens of an Indian sate remain the same. Nothing much has changed.
As a result of episode, SC/ST anti atrocities act has been passed in 1989. The act has had little benefit in protecting the Dalits of Lakshimpet in 2002.
The officers who dealt with this cases made a joke of this act and did precious little in the Lakshmipet incident. In fact, June 12 attack was not the first even before when the Revenue Department and the Police Department knew some preplanned attacks made by “KAPU” community heads on Dalits. But no action was initiated. The picket at Lakshmipet was withdrawn with a plea of sending protection forces to cover by election in Narasannapeta. The withdrawal of picket, in fact helped the upper caste people to go and attack the Dalits more easily and with great impunity.
What has happened in reality?
When more than 100 east “KAPU” caste people assembled with axes, sickles and crowbars at 7:00 A.M on June 12, 2012 in Lakshimpet village. Ex Sarpanch, Chittiri Gangulu at once called the police station’s S.I Sudhakar, in Vangara. The S.I informed that he had at the moment only one constable in the P.S and promised to send forces within short time. The distance between Vangara and Lakshmipet was 4 KM and the police forces could reach the village within 15 minutes. But nothing of that kind happened. Gangulu kept on phoning the P.S while the massacre of Dalits was going on. Finally the police reached (but of no use).
Tsunduru Massacre – where are the culprits?
Till to date it remains a puzzle if it is not those twenty one convicts awarded with life term imprisonment by the lower court who are the real criminals? After the A.P. High Court dispensed with the case having no solid proof against the accused, left them scot free. The investigations carried out by the police personals and through probe by the special court with more than 200 upper caste eye witness, the High Court ruled that no adequate ‘proof’ against the accused and hence left them free.
It is not A.P alone, all over India this trend is being followed. In 1996, the Patna High Court freed all the accused as being innocent. Then who killed those lower caste women and children including some Muslims totaling more than twenty. Members of Ranveer Army massacred fifty eight Dalits in Laxmanpur Bathe in Bihar in 1997. All the twenty six accused who were sentenced by the lower court were freed by the Bihar High Court in 2013 as being innocent? In 2014 it became the turn of A.P High Court to give ‘clean chit’ to the accused in ‘Tsunduru Massacre’.
What are the reasons for not proving the Tsunduru Massacre?
The High Court reasoned a lack of clarity in the eye witness at the time of murder to the police, postmortem report being not in order as to the time of murder and impropriety in the analysis of the case events by the lower court as being the main issues for accepting the punishment meted out by the lower court. For want of solid proof and a strong benefit of doubt, the High Court declared the accused as free and released them unscathed.
Was there not really any clarity in the police investigations?
The honorable Judges asked a basic question how did the three bodies remained at the same place while the other five have washed away. The court did not believe the eye witness because all the dead bodies did not wash away nor remained in the same place.
Is delay in report the event a big offence?
The court said that while it is a fundamental duty of all the citizens to report a crime to the police soon after it is committed. Are all the Indian citizens educated to be in the know of criminal procedure code is the point which the court did not, perhaps, count. The fact of the matter was the killer kept at bay all the Dalits from reporting the case to the police by threatening them with the weapons. Fifty of the Upper Caste people who were caught redhandedly with weapons were left free by an S.I at the advice of C.I. the police provided escort the Reddy family children but not to the Dalits who were afraid to go out of their homes for fear of being killed by the Upper Caste people. The court argued why Jaladi Mathaiah did not save his father while he was being killed by the murderers even at the risk of losing his own life. Mathaiah was 15 Yrs old at the time of crime. His eye witness was not considered by the court.
The bone of contention expressed by the High Court before cancelling the lower court’s verdict and setting the accused free was the following:-
- Why were the three dead bodies at one place only? How could the other five dead bodies move away from the spot of crime? The fact was the canal was filled with the weeds and hence could not move away. But the court did not believe and the eyewitnesses were nulled.
- The post mortem report suggested that the victims died in different times, so the Judges did not accept that the arguments that all the dead people did not expire on the August 6, 1991. The prosecution argument that the murders took place on the said date. The plea was cancelled by the Judges. The public prosecution was thought of having not presented the case effectively.
The analysis of the witness statements and the corroboration of the events were not done in a right way. This became the opinion of many learned organizations and individuals after the case was finalized and heard.
In our society the caste is overdriving factor and is responsible for violation of civil liberties. It is an unwritten fact that regardless of a strict and very liberal constitution in place, it is the higher caste lords who are ruling the roost. Under these circumstances what signals such justification of crime send to the society. The responsibility of protesting is with us. Let us hope that the Supreme Court shall render relief to the families of the victims. Let us all work together.
No comments:
Post a Comment