Shiban Khaibri
Countrymen remain beholden for all times to those of its soldiers, who lay down their lives defending the country so that the people may feel protected and secured to enjoy their lives. Death is a fact which horrifies even the bravest. Something peculiar, however, the Almighty has bestowed upon a soldier which makes him to brave the ominous-ness of lurking death while fighting an enemy of his country. Indian soldier is a step further in that he defies death and its incessant fear while facing an enemy.  There are innumerable instances of our such heroes , that is why, we at numerous occasions  go beyond certain conventions in deciding about whether a flower, believed to be a symbol and a  mark of  reverential respect, be offered to a worshipped deity, or to a nymph, or to a celestial bride or to an honest  political leader. None of these deserve a flower in comparison to those brave hearts who march ahead to save their country and attain martyrdom. We have very intense literary contours and interpretations over this and traditions as well. Don’t we very often say that every year the martyrdom shall  reverentially be commemorated there, where martyrs’ last rites were performed  and sing in patriotic chorus …”Wattan par marney waloon ka baqi yahi nishan hoga”.
It is a natural corollary, therefore, that we must have a responsible and reverential commitment on a continuous basis, for all times to come, through all generations, for our martyrs and never should there be any occasion or reason of eroding of their memories. They never deserve to be forgotten. It is however, painful to see that the country’s Home Minister should attempt to trivialize the martyrdom of Lance Naik Hemraj  by saying,” It is an old issue, let us not rake it up again, let us close the chapter.” This “historic” statement was given by Sushil Kumar Shindey on Jan 10, this year  when pressmen asked him about martyr Hemraj’s severed head  (read sheesh)  having been  paraded in a Pakistan town as a trophy about which some TV Channels had aired the footage  of the videos about such inhuman and barbaric act. It may be recalled that last year on Jan 8 in an ambush by Pakistani soldiers, Hemraj was killed along with another soldier while patrolling the LOC in Jammu and Kashmir. Later, his head was dismembered by the attackers in an extreme inhuman act. Instead of giving any convincing reply, Shindey termed the beheading of our soldier and parading of it as a trophy in Pakistan as a mere “old incident and that now every thing is fine at the border.” In a press conference he also advised the media not to “spread fire on this issue.” He did not stop at that and said,” several such videos emerge, do not broadcast (meaning telecasting and printing) them.” The question is whether martyrdom of a soldier in particular like that of Hemraj can be just a simple thing as his head was severed mercilessly, throwing to winds all norms of humanity and civilization. God has not created man in this world to behave with a fellow human being in a savage barbaric way even if from another country, religion, colour etc. The Home Minister, instead of at least expressing regrets for which he had to expend no effort or lose any thing, chose with his unsavoury remarks to demean and dilute the supreme sacrifice of the soldier, terming it as “an old issue”. Can martyrs’ memories and respect for them be prescribed for a fixed small period, say 6 months or a year? Applying that yard stick, are we then to forget our heroes like Ram Prasad Bismal, Baghat Singh, Sukhdev, Raj Guru, Chander Shekhar Azad, Ushfaq Ullah Khan and thousands of other martyrs who laid down their lives for us, for this country and  for our future generations?  Another question arises as to whether justice and its dispensation can have expiry dates?  Another question arises as to at whose instance  and why, proof was  suppressed  in respect of  the guilt of Pakistan in the macabre of beheading and then making videos of the severed head , its parading and its displaying as a trophy?  Is it a fact that the video displayed on the TV Channels has already been in the possession of the government since May 2013 and it has not used it to name and shame Pakistan in the polity of nations? The nation needs answers, the media needs answers, the martyr’s family needs answers. Is there any one in the current dispensation to furnish some answers and explain the causes of apathy and indifference towards such a sensitive issue?
It is not the end of the story. There are reportedly 9 such heart rendering Pakistani CDs with 90 proofs of video recording  not only of Hemraj but how Pakistani troops were aiming at and attacking our security personnel guarding the country’s posts at the LOC.  A leading TV Channel of the country claimed to be in possession of such video material. Videos have also been made by Pakistani troops and other agencies of ambushing Indian patrol and firing at them. What is the motive behind Pakistan making such videos is nothing excepting motivating young people to join the armed terrorists groups to infiltrate into our territories and create vast disturbances, to derive sadistic pleasures at death and destruction and to propagate among the prospective recruits about their so called upper hand as facing no deterrent reply from the victim country.
These videos are glaring proof of war crimes and a fit case for the international community to call the bluff of Pakistan and its repeated debased approach in solving problems, if any, with this country. Turning a blind eye by the government to the problem or advising the media not to report because “wrong messages are getting conveyed” is fraught with dangerous repercussions. We must bear it in mind as experience in dealing with Pakistan suggests, that in that country the army, the ISI and the Lashker -e- Toiba are working in unison and in tandem against this country our offer of friendship to and negotiations with Pakistan not- withstanding.
The Home Minister appears to have other priorities like on recurring basis, playing minority card as he recently reiterated in a press meet that he has again written to all state Chief Ministers “to be very careful while arresting the members of the minority community.” It clearly means that the CMs need not be equally careful while arresting members of the majority community. It is appearing all mysterious and motivated. This is no playing of communalism in the political philosophy of the Congress and the Congress leader Home Minister Shinde but secularism. In his opinion, it also could   not be any de-motivating exercise undertaken for the Police who have to toil hard to nab a criminal of whichever community.  He is bogged with another more important problem than the pressing national issues and in his opinion,   Sharad Pawar of NCP could be a better PM  and he would be happy seeing him as PM since “Pawar had brought me  in  politics” and that Pawar has been  a contender “for PM’s post since 1992”.  It is ironic that the level of governance of the UPA2 is continuously plummeting and none appears in the dispensation in arresting such slippage and issues like national security too are taken in a lackadaisical way.

Syed Ali Mujtaba
The gang rape of a 16-year-old girl, her death and police cover-up has further marred Kolkata’s nickname “City of joy”. Less than a year since Delhi’s young paramedic’s rape case shook the nation, the capital of West Bengal has been besieged by the horrific case. In fact, the latest incident has put a big question mark on the effectiveness of the new Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill in place. Is women’s safety, really a priority with those who govern?
Not only was the girl, from Madhyamgram, North 24 Parganas district, raped twice in October last but set ablaze by the accused. As she succumbed to her injuries on December 31, her parents have been running from pillar to post (Governor to the President) to get justice. Fortunately, the Calcutta High Court has stepped in asking the State Government to spell out its position on the demand for a CBI probe and also providing security to the girl’s family.
However, the protests are reminiscent of those which took place in New Delhi after a young paramedic was gang-raped in a moving bus on December 16, 2012. It left an indelible mark in the minds of the people and sparked a debate about the safety of our women. A year after, the Kolkata case has raised the question whether there any meaningful changes in the attitude of society towards women? The answer is as depressing as before.
While various State Governments had announced a slew of measures, such as setting up of help lines and women help desks at police stations, these appear to have had little impact. If we look at the statistics provided by the Delhi Police and National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB), we find that all talks of women safety and meaningful change in the society’s attitude towards them remain a mirage and the hope of women being safe still a pipe dream.
There has been a 125% jump in the number of rape cases in Delhi since December 16, 2012. Molestation cases are up a massive 417%. The Delhi Police till November 2013 has registered 1,493 cases of rape against 661 in the corresponding period last year, 3,237 cases of molestation against 625, 852 cases of harassment against 165.
As per the data of National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB), a total of 706 rape cases were registered in 2012, while the numbers of registered rape cases were 572 in 2011 as against 507 rape cases reported in 2010. The figure stood at 469 in 2009. In 2008, the figure was 466, while in 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001 the figures were 598, 623, 658, 551, 490, 403 and 381 respectively. But it must be noted that these are only reported cases, and perhaps only the tip of the iceberg.
However, the Delhi Police says the figures of the growing crime against women are not disturbing news because the rise in such cases and molestation in the nation’s capital is due to more cases being reported and registered now. Can we believe this argument?
Nevertheless, the police claim that it has put in place measures to make the city safe. These include, an all-women police mobile team round-the-clock, orders to ensure immediate registration of FIRs in cases of crime against women and that efforts are made to file chargesheet against the accused within three months, patrolling has been increased, especially at night and on routes taken by BPO vehicles ferrying women and 24-hour police cover has been ensured around entertainment hubs like malls and cinema halls with heightened vigil from 8 PM to 1 AM. Further, a ‘Parivartan’ (change) scheme has been launched to create awareness in schools, localities and police stations, etc. It would do one better, to get a regular feedback on whether these efforts have made any difference at all.
At the national level, the Centre passed Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill-2013. It also amended various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Indian Evidence Act and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The new law stated that an offender can be sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 20 years, but which may extend to life, meaning imprisonment for the remainder of the convict’s natural life and with a fine. It also has provisions for handing out death sentence to offenders, who may have been convicted earlier for such crimes.
The law, for the first time, defines stalking and voyeurism as non-bailable offences if repeated for a second time. Perpetrators of acid attack will get a 10-year jail term. However, with the increasing number of cases coming to limelight, it is widely felt that the systemic changes have failed to produce any results. The harsh reality is the uncivilized mindset against the fair sex still nurtures amidst the so-called modern India of the 21st century.
Undoubtedly, while key amendments have been made to update the criminal laws dealing with heinous crimes against women, a lot more needs to be done. It is important to bear in mind that, the fear of law for those indulging in crimes such as rape will only be there if these are strictly enforced. However, the implementation part still remains a major cause of worry.
Another worry is that all the legislations made still remain on paper. There is no change whatsoever on ground realities. The society still has not learnt how to treat rape victims who are subjected to all sorts of harassment. If the nation is seriously looking at addressing this issue, then something more needs to be done than merely passing laws.
There is an urgent need to set up ‘one-stop centers’ to end the agony of victims who manage to reach a hospital after being subjected to sexual assault of any kind. It must be mandatory for all hospitals to have such a centre with all encompassing protocol for the provision of medical, legal, and rehabilitative services for the victims. The PCR vans too have to be directed to take victims to the nearest hospital with such a centre to save their life and dignity.
Importantly, women police officers, lady doctors, woman counsellors, trained nurses, forensic experts and a designated judicial magistrate are all required to attend to the victims.
Besides, the Rs 100-crore Nirbhaya Fund should be utilized at the earliest to put in place the infrastructure for better safety of women. The Women and Child Development Ministry had proposed a new programme to be funded from it, called Shubh, which would map vulnerable areas and categories of women who need protection. This must be executed at the earliest. Other important areas, like inclusion of gender sensitization in schools syllabi and awareness campaigns in society to treat women as equals and respect must be pursued more vigorously.
Given the yawning gap between what is being preached and practiced, the issue of the safety of women in India, sadly still has a long way to go. A year’s time is too little to see the changes taking place, but if we persistently try to eliminate such ills, there is hope for results in future. The chill wind has started blowing, if that’s the sign of winter, spring is not far away. INFA

Arun Jaitley
The founding fathers of our Constitution envisaged the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the Constitution. Article 44 of the Constitution states “The state shall endeavour to ensure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India”. Uniform Civil Code can only deal with rights of the citizens and not religious rituals.  However, some people misguided themselves to believe that a uniform civil code would be an interference in their religious rights. The framers of our laws while still permitting separate personal laws dealing with civil rights did not make any exception with regard to criminal law.  A crime is a crime irrespective of the birth marks of the criminal. His religious beliefs cannot determine his guilt or innocence.
The Union Home Minister,  Sushil Kumar Shinde, has announced that he would be writing to all Chief Ministers to review terrorism cases against members of the minority communities. Obviously, he has only religious minority and not linguistic minority in his mind. He expects the State Government to set up Review Committees to deal with cases against a category of citizens and not all persons who have been charged for terrorism offences. This raises certain fundamental questions with regard to the propriety and the legality of the move initiated by the Home Minister.
The move is clearly political. There are several persons charged with offences of terror in India. The provisions have been invoked against those associated with certain radical Islamic groups. In the last few years there are a few members of the majority community also who were charged in a set of cases. Maoists have been charged in terror offences in several parts of the country.  The provisions of the anti-terror laws have been invoked against some persons in the North-East and Jammu & Kashmir.  There are pre-2004 cases pending under POTA. Subsequent cases are predominantly under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. A move that only a certain category of cases would be reviewed  on the eve of election is intended to link the otherwise uniform application of criminal law with vote bank politics.
Such a move is clearly unconstitutional. Article 14 guarantees to every citizen a right to equality. There can be a reasonable classification based on an intelligible and distinctive criteria. The criteria that the facility of reviewing terror cases would be extended to persons depending on which faith they believe in  or are born into is clearly  unconstitutional. A crime does not cease to be a crime because a criminal practices in a particular faith.  States are now being mandated by the Union Home Ministry to review cases of only persons belonging to a certain faith. An atheist, agnostic and believers in the Hindu faith would admittedly be kept out. A contradiction would also be there. The believers of Hindu faith would constitute a minority in Jammu & Kashmir and certain States of North-East. Would they be eligible for review in these States or would the majority in these States be treated  as national minority and be eligible for review of cases? What would happen to cases (say against the Maoists) where some of the co-accused belong to one religion and others belong to a different community. There can be no doubt that the criteria adopted by the Union Home Minister is clearly violative of the constitutional guarantee of equality since it is not based on rationale or intelligible criteria.
The power to withdraw a prosecution is circumscribed by section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It is only a Public Prosecutor who after application of mind for ‘good reason’ has the power to move the court seeking withdrawal of a case. The judge has to apply his mind to allow the withdrawal of a case. Criminal law does not provide for any review Committee for withdrawal of pending cases where charge sheets have been filed.  Whenever law makers have felt the need, they have specifically provided for such a Review Committee. An extra legal review committee which substitutes the discretion of the public prosecutor and the judge follows a procedure unknown to law. The same is clearly violative of even the provisions of criminal law.
The directive/advisory of the Union Home Minister to the States to discriminate between criminals on basis of religion is based on an improper policy. It violates the constitutional guarantee of equality. It is violative of the fundamental principles and provisions of criminal law. The States are not bound by such unconstitutional directives of the Home Minister.
(The author is Leader  of the Opposition in Rajya Sabha)