Jharkhand police wield sedition stick most to hunt down Maoist rebels
A wave of protests may have rocked the Capital over sedition charges
against JNU student leader Kanhaiya Kumar but thousands of miles away,
the Maoist violence-hit Jharkhand has the highest number of such cases
in India. The state registered 18 sedition cases in 2014. Most of them
were against Maoist rebels, their front organisations and sympathisers,
who have a presence in 16 of the state’s 24 districts. Extremist
violence has killed 499 civilians and 1,689 policemen in the past 15
years.
Top officials say lower-rung police officers use the 156-year-old
sedition provision liberally against Maoist rebels when they attack
forces, hoist black flags during national festivals, or are found
carrying pamphlets against India’s unity and integrity. But many of
these cases collapse and embarrass the force. “IPC Section 124-A
(sedition) is very loosely worded and open to varied interpretations,”
said Jharkhand police additional director general of police (ADGP)
special branch Anurag Gupta. But do cases end up into convictions?
“Unfortunately no, because evidences are scanty and procedures are not
followed completely,” Gupta said. Several senior state police officials
conceded there was a severe lack of knowledge about sedition laws among
lower rung officers. In some cases, chargesheets were filed without
seeking the government’s permission—mandatory for framing sedition
charges — resulting in major embarrassment for the police in courts,
said AGDP Anil Palta.
“The cops blatantly used sedition against most of us. The idea was to
prevent us from getting bail sooner whenever we got caught or
surrendered,” said Yugal Pal, once a senior Maoist commander and now a
social activist in Palamu. Pal said as newer laws came in place, police
switched from Section 124 (A) to 17 Criminal Law Amendment Act (CLAA)
and the Unlawful Assembly Prevention Act (UAPA) as these laws were
tougher and required lesser intervention by the state. But state
secretary of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties Shashi Bhushan
Pathak said it was easy to “frame” Maoists for sedition as they were
locals fighting against forcible usurping of their land and minerals by
corporates. Economist Harishwar Dayal, director of Institute for Human
Development (IHD), eastern regional centre said until non-state players
shun violence and provide alternative growth plans, they will “remain
enemies in the eyes of law”.
“India of the 21st century does not require a law used by the
colonial government to suppress India’s voice,” said
Maoist-turned-activist Satishji. Slain CPI (Maoist) politburo member
Koteshwar Rao alias Kishenji had argued with HT months before his death
in an encounter with forces that Maoists were the biggest patriots. “If
Pakistan attacks India, we would be happy to form the first line of
defence against them. Unfortunately, the state considers us bigger
enemies.” Another Maoist spokesperson, Bablooji, had said they take 7 %
levy for running their revolutionary force and carrying out development
programmes in villages. The government officers take 20-30 % cut in
allocating welfare schemes. “Who is anti-national?” he had asked.
No comments:
Post a Comment