Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, July 31: Even as both houses of Parliament continued to remain disrupted over the opposition demand for a discussion on Manipur, the central government faced tough questions on Manipur from the Supreme Court which took up the petition of two women paraded naked and sexually assaulted by a mob.
What happened in Manipur could not be justified “by saying that this and this happened elsewhere”, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said, when a lawyer brought up the recent poll violence in Bengal. The “systemic” and “unprecedented magnitude” of sexual violence committed against women in Manipur amidst ethnic clashes cannot be excused on the ground that crimes happened to women in other parts of the country too.
“You cannot excuse what is taking place in Manipur now on the ground that such crimes are happening to several other women as well in other parts of the country,” Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, heading a three-judge Bench, observed. The Chief Justice raised six pointed questions and sought a response within 24 hours by the Centre and Manipur.
“There is no gainsaying the fact that crimes against women are taking place in all parts. The only answer is this. You cannot excuse what is taking place in one part of the country, like Manipur, on the ground that similar crimes are happening in other parts too. The question is, how do we deal with Manipur? Mention that…Are you saying protect all daughters of India or don’t protect anyone?” the Chief Justice asked, responding to lawyer Bansuri Swaraj, who spoke about crimes against women in Bengal, Rajasthan, and Chhattisgarh.
“We are dealing with something which is of unprecedented nature — violence in a situation of communal and sectarian strife.” The Bench was dealing with an application that there were women in West Bengal, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, and Kerala, all of which happened to be non-BJP ruled States, who were victims of crimes and still waiting for justice.
Advocate Bansuri Swaraj, who represented the application, argued that any mechanism evolved by the Supreme Court to bring justice to the women of Manipur, be it a Central Bureau of investigation probe or Supreme Court monitoring of investigations, should be extended to the women victims of these States. “They are all daughters of India,” Ms Swaraj, advocate and daughter of the former union minister Sushma Swaraj, submitted.
“The only difference is this… Undoubtedly, there are crimes taking place against women all over the country. That is part of our social reality. However, in Manipur, we are dealing with something which is of an unprecedented magnitude, mainly crimes and the perpetration of violence in a situation of communal and sectarian strife,” Chief Justice Chandrachud distinguished between the situation in Manipur and other States.
The Chief Justice said nobody was denying the fact that there were crimes against women, possibly in West Bengal as well. Ms Swaraj persisted that the crimes against women in West Bengal were “equally grave.” She submitted that a panchayat election candidate in West Bengal was sexually assaulted by a mob and paraded nude. She agreed that the Manipur incident was “horrific” and seemed to have “woken up the conscience of the civil society,” but said more such “bone-chilling” facts were coming to light.
“But similar things are happening in Rajasthan, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh, and Kerala. My Lords must protect all daughters of India and not limit the mechanism to only Manipur,” Ms Swaraj urged the court. To this, the Chief Justice asked, “are you for a moment saying that do something for all the daughters of India or don’t do anything for anybody at all?” “No, all the daughters of India,” Ms Swaraj clarified.
On a request from the lawyer for the two victims, who argued that the women should have confidence in the investigation, the government said it had no objection if the Supreme Court monitored the investigation in the case. “The government doesn’t have the data now to tell you how many such cases have been registered. That shows the state of affairs,” senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the two women, said while requesting a Supreme Court-monitored probe.
The court asked the Centre how many of around 6,000 FIRs filed since the violence broke out in Manipur were for crimes against women. The Centre said it did not have a break-up of such cases. The Supreme Court then directed the Centre and the Manipur government to return tomorrow with information on six points: Break-up of cases, How many zero FIRs, How many transferred to the police station that has jurisdiction, How many arrested so far, Status of legal aid to the arrested accused and How many Section 164 statements (or statements before the nearest magistrate) recorded so far
The Supreme Court termed the offences against women “horrendous”, and said it did not want the case to be handled by Manipur police. “Time running out for us, there is great need to have healing touch in the state,” it said. “This is not just one case like Nirbhaya. That is one isolated incident. Here it’s a systemic violence perpetrated,” the Supreme Court added.
Police were collaborating with the culprits who perpetrated the violence, Sibal alleged earlier during arguments, adding that the women sought protection from the police, but they took them to the crowd instead. “Incident on May 4. Zero FIR was registered on May 18. Transferred to the concerned police station in June. The video went viral on July 19 and only after this court took cognisance, things progressed in the case. The survivors should have the confidence in the investigation,” he said. The Supreme Court also pulled up the Centre, asking what they were doing for 14 days.
The top court was hearing the centre’s request to transfer the case of the two women in the horrific Manipur video to a different state, like neighbouring Assam. The women objected to the transfer of the case to the CBI.
“The survivors are traumatised and terrorised. We are not sure whether the survivors will tell the truth to a CBI team. They should have the confidence to tell the truth,” Senior Advocate Indira Jaising said, asking for a high-powered committee of women members from civil society, so these survivors could come forward and share the truth.
“Merely entrusting to CBI or SIT would not be enough. We will have to picture a situation where a 19-year-old woman who has lost her family is in a relief camp. We cannot have her going to magistrate. We have to ensure that the process of justice goes to her doorstep. We will constitute a committee of women judges and members of civil society, who will in turn get the assistance of members of civil societies,” the court said.
Attorney-General R Venkataramani then said there were “too many complications”, both political and non-political, and proposed a CBI probe. Chief Justice Chandrachud observed that the video was not the only incident. “What happened to these three women is not an isolated incident,” he said, and called for a broader mechanism to take care of violence against women in the north-eastern state.
“This is apparent from the Home Secretary’s affidavit. As much as we want to give justice to the two women, we want to put in a mechanism where justice is available to all other women. We have to put in a mechanism to ensure complaints are filed, FIRs are lodged,” he said. He then asked the Centre’s lawyer how many FIRs had been registered on violence against women.
The two women have filed petitions against the centre and the Manipur government, requesting the Supreme Court’s intervention and a fair and impartial inquiry. The victims have also requested that their identities be protected. The two women have been referred to as “X” and “Y” in the court documents. They have sought a probe led by an independent Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by an Inspector General-rank police officer, and the transfer of the trial outside the state.
Stating that they have no faith in the state police, the women have also sought security and orders to enable the recording of their statement by the nearest area magistrate. This comes at a time when the centre has already transferred the case to the CBI.
The Supreme Court stepped in on July 20 amid nationwide outrage over the video. The court said it was “deeply disturbed”, and that using women as instruments for perpetrating violence is “simply unacceptable in a constitutional democracy.” A bench headed by the Chief Justice directed the Centre and the Manipur government to take immediate remedial, rehabilitative, and preventive steps and apprise it of the action taken.
On July 27, the Centre informed the top court that it has transferred the case to the CBI, saying the government has “zero tolerance towards any crimes against women.” The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), in an affidavit filed through its Secretary Ajay Kumar Bhalla, also urged the top court to transfer the trial outside Manipur in the case for the conclusion of the trial in a time-bound manner. Seven people have been arrested in the case so far.
Meanwhile, the union finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman ridiculed the opposition for not letting Parliament function to discuss the Manipur issues even after a 21-member INDIA delegation visited the state and return on Sunday to apprise Parliament of the situation they had seen in the north-eastern state.
She said the government has agreed to discuss the Manipur ethnic violence in parliament, but the opposition has not allowed that to happen. “People have come to Manipur, spoken to people there and come back. We want to hear what they heard from people in Manipur,” Ms Sitharaman told reporters on Monday.
“Who is stopping them from bringing this up in parliament? They have been asking for a discussion in parliament, what stops them? It is clear the opposition has been shedding crocodile tears. If their concerns were genuine, they would have allowed parliament discussion,” Ms Sitharaman said.