K. B. Jandial
It is very easy, albeit, convenient for everyone to condemn, perhaps rightly so, BJP MLAs for assaulting Er. Rashid in the Assembly on Thursday but it requires a lot of courage, conviction and commitment to appreciate and boldly speak out the hurt religious feelings caused by wicked acts like the Beef Party hosted by Langate MLA at Srinagar’s MLA Hostel lawns. He enacted this sordid act at an official place, controlled by the Speaker’s office, on the eve of Assembly taking up his controversial Private Member’s Bill along with similar Bills of NC and Tarigami seeking repeal of anti- beef provisions in RPC.
For Hindus, it was indeed, an act of blasphemy having no parallel in Kashmir’s history. While all laws are usually violated, some with impunity, and may include anti-beef provisions, but no such beef party was ever heard before in Kashmir as the Muslims always respected Hindu sentiments. The forefathers of almost all Muslims have Hindu lineage, being the converts and they never reviled Hindu beliefs and traditions. Then why did Er Rashid do it? Was it only political one-upmanship to prove that he can break the law publically and get away with it? While he did get away with it but not without destabilizing State’s fragile communal amity and peace as is evident from unfortunate events that followed his horrendous act. Despite maintaining silence by BJP’s leadership in the face of continuous provocations causing resentment in Jammu, Hindu sentiments were genuinely outraged, beef party being the flash point. None in Kashmir condemned him.
As its immediate fallout, the hurt ruling BJP MLAs led by aggressive Ravinder Raina took law in their hands and thrashed him in the Assembly the next morning. Politically, it was an unwise act that made Rashid a “victim of hindutva” and leaders compared him to Akhlaq of Dadri. It gave advantage to those who otherwise should have been booked for inciting religious feelings of people. But locally, Nowshera MLA has become iconic “Sher-i-dil” for many in Jammu.
Whatever are reactions of political parties, the fact is that both the incidents are highly condemnable. It would be difficult to say which one was more serious than the other.
Former CM Omar Abdullah’s assertion that Rashid has done no crime by hosting Beef Party lacks legal support. Omar is wrong but what he said is the popular impression created by the Supreme Court Order of Oct. 5, 2015. Even the PDP Ministers expressed happiness on the SC order saying that the sensibilities of the people have been addressed. In fact, the State Govt. of which BJP is a partner, was irked by 8th September order of Jammu Bench of HC and rushed to SC to get this order stayed. Media too created a perception that ban on cow slaughter etc has been stayed for two months. As seen in the last seven months of “marriage of inconvenience” with PDP, the BJP has defaulted in putting SC order in correct perspective despite the fact that a battery of competent and senior lawyers are in its rank and file.
The Apex Court passed the following order on 5th October, 2015:
“Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following order
The question of maintainability of the Special Leave Petitions is kept open.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we pass the following order:-
The order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu in Writ Petition (PIL) No.24/2014, dated 08.09.2015 is kept in abeyance for a period of two months from today.”
Now, what was the High Court order of 8th September? The Division Bench of State High Court at Jammu comprising Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Janak Raj Kotwal had observed, “Divisional Commissioner Kashmir has not filed an appropriate response regarding the smuggling and slaughtering of bovine animals and subsequently their sale especially in Kashmir valley”. It gave direction to DGP to ensure that appropriate directions are issued to all SSPs/SPs/SHOs for enforcement of this law. Strict action shall be taken in accordance with law against those who indulge in this activity.
On previous hearing on 4th August, 2015, the bench comprising Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat had issued notice to Chief Secretary, Principal Secretary, Home and Director General of Police returnable within six weeks and directed the Divisional Commissioners of Kashmir and Jammu to submit a report by or before the next date of hearing indicating the steps that have been taken with a view to prevent such offences.
Since the SC order is in the public domain and the a section of the media, Ministers and Political leaders have interpreted in the same manner as expressed by Omar Abdullah that slaughtering of cows and sale of beef is no longer an offence. Is it so? One doesn’t have to be a legal luminary to understand the actual meaning of the order. The SC has kept “in abeyance” (it avoided the expression “stay”) the impugned order of 8th September, 2015 for two months which has tasked the DGP for enforcement of Sections 298 A, B, C &D of RPC. The operation of these penal sections has not been stayed or put on hold by the Apex Court and as such all such acts falling under these penal sections continue to be the cognizable offences entailing police action. The only difference is that default in such cases would not lead to contempt of court or the police would not be accountable to the HC for action or non action.
Otherwise also, the SC could not have stayed operation of these provisions unless it has dealt with a petition challenging the vires of these old provisions. Moreover, the Apex Court has kept open the question of maintainability of the SLP.
In 2005, the SC by six to one majority decision in the case titled State of Gujarat vs. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat & ors had upheld the views of the Apex Court in earlier cases that the Act prohibiting slaughter of cows was “intra vires” of the Constitution. It held that “we are unhesitatingly of the opinion that there is no apparent inconsistency between the Directive Principles which persuaded the State to pass the law and the Fundamental Rights canvassed before the High Court by the writ petitioners.”
After these avoidable ugly incidents, BJP spokesperson Sunil Sethi, an eminent lawyer and counsel of the Petitioner in PIL before Jammu bench came up with a statement holding that the Omar Abdullah’s justification of Supreme Court order to organize beef party as “ridiculous as the Apex Court has only stayed implementation of court order so that the Govt. may not report compliance to the court”.
Things would not have come to such an ugly pass had someone explained the SC order in correct perspective and the mainstream political leaders including PDP Ministers exercised restrained in their political outbursts. Even a Minister took pride in telling in the Council that he has right to eat beef and asserted that nobody can interfere with his fundamental right. Is it proper for the Law Minister to break the law of the land and then promote its violation?
While inciting hatred and hurting religious beliefs of a minority, the leaders who always indulge in vote bank politics, forget that minority and majority changes from one area to another and the dangerous game they are playing would lead to chain reaction as is seen in Chenani.
It is a paradox that those leaders who added fuel to the fire, showed contempt for minority sentiments and put the ‘temple of democracy’ to shame by their conduct, passed on the very next day an unanimous resolution in both houses of the legislature “reiterating the firm and unshakeable faith of the people of Jammu & Kashmir in its age-old traditions of secularism, pluralism and tolerance. This House as the representative body of the will of the people of Jammu & Kashmir reasserts the need for strengthening further the bonds of brotherhood and fortify the values that have distinguished Jammu & Kashmir in the entire Sub-continent in the most trying circumstances that led the Father of the Nation, Mahatma Gandhi, to see a ray of light from here.”
Sounds laudable! But do these words carry conviction? Do they have soothing and healing touch on the wounds of the outraged minority? The speeches of Omar Abdullah, the mover of the resolution, and CM Mufti Sayeed echoed the glorious past when Mahatma Gandhi saw a ray of hope coming from Kashmir amidst communal frenzy elsewhere but do the shameful events on beef entitle them to be the rightful inheritor of the legacy of Sheikh Abdullah?
How distressing is the fact that Sheikh’s grandson justified cow slaughter and beef party and his “secular” party made in vain attempt to scrap these provisions in RPC which his grandfather and father did not touch, merely because this would have hurt Hindu sentiments. Critical analysis of the speeches and wordings of the resolution left no one in doubt that it was motivated only to overcome the “trauma” of manhandling Er. Rashid, and not the hurt feelings of the minority community. Equally dispersing was that no BJP leader sought suitable modification of the resolution.
The advice is obviously targeted to BJP legislators and their likes in Jammu who must show restraint when cows are slaughtered and beef eaten at parties as their newly perceived religious “obligation”. Doesn’t it sound like “the devil citing Scripture?” Whatever the resolution is worth of, will peace and harmony survive such onslaught of Er. Rashid and his likes?
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel