Bombay riots

‘Mumbai Mafia’ Has a Few Insights but the Documentary Ultimately Feels Slim and Superficial

Netflix’s latest true crime offering is a typical ‘snackumentary’ – a filmmaking equivalent of franchise fast food that aims for the easiest pleasures, not hard-fought longevity.

A Netflix true crime documentary often relies on a template: drone shots, dramatic reconstructions, archival footage, thumping thrills. That style once made nonfiction appealing, but its indiscriminate application over the last several years has made it formulaic and, at its worst, contrived. You won’t find a director’s voice in these films – only the streaming platform’s. Not all true crime pieces – or documentaries in other genres even – need stylised narrative desperation. Indian true crime documentaries on Netflix, with the major exception of Bad Boys Billionaires, have ranged from embarrassing (Crime Stories: India Detectives) to mediocre (A Big Little Murder) to middling (House of Secrets: The Burari Deaths).

Netflix’s latest offering, Mumbai Mafia: Police vs The Underworld, enters a terrain that’s spawned a surfeit of stories: the ‘encounter’ cops and the gangsters. But an international platform like Netflix – hosting a diverse audience – creates another narrative problem: how to tell a story that doesn’t spoon-feed its well-known details, such as the Mumbai underworld to an Indian audience, and yet explains it enough to not alienate the other unfamiliar viewers.

Filmmakers Raaghav Dar and Francis Longhurst don’t have an inventive solution. So their 87-minute documentary takes its time setting up the first act, replete with all the identifiable tropes, where each incident has produced enough fictional films and documentaries: the rise of organised crime in Mumbai, the ‘shootout at Lokhandwala’, the Babri Masjid demolition, the 93 Bombay blasts. Its talking heads try their best, however, to sustain the audience’s interest. A (very) animated Minty Tejpal, a crime reporter in the 90s, cuts a dramatic and entertaining figure (sometimes too dramatic, such as calling the Babri a “Muslim mosque”).

But an obvious lack of moderation makes the initial segment limp. When the movie was still explaining the Bombay riots, it pricked my patience and compelled me to check the progress bar: 40 minutes — almost half the runtime. Till then, it had introduced a few cops – most notably the pivotal Pradeep Sharma – who only touched upon their increasing tussles with the underworld. But soon, Mumbai Mafia turns on its head via two key inclusions: the cops’ unchecked killings, along with their seniors’ approval, media deification, movie portrayals; and their abject lack of moral compass.

The first part – just by the nature of the story itself – is fascinating and disturbing. A city where many cops look more murderous, more amoral, more sociopathic than the gangsters. A city doomed and destined to be ruled by one gun-toting gang or the other. The cops Sharma and Ravindra Angre (who looks so pissed off that ‘Ravindra Angry’ sounds better on him) complicate the story further, almost bragging about their killings. It reminded me of Joshua Oppenheimer’s The Act of Killing (2012), where the perpetrators of the Indonesian genocide admitted their murders on camera, producing documentary filmmaking’s finest hour: the state-sanctioned horrific human condition. Mumbai Mafia provides crucial context, too: journalist Puja Changoiwala compares the extent of the two massacres – the cops killing around 1,200 people, more than five times the death count in the Bombay bomb blasts.

Dar and Longhurst also explore the other aspects of the story, as their documentary gathers renewed purpose and vitality. They interview an ex-D-company member, Shyam Kishore, treating his transformation and fear – Sharma had scared him so much that he lay low Goa in for years – with dignified empathy. The cop A.A. Khan, who headed the Lokhandwala shootout, calls the encounter killings “morally reprehensible”. Crime reporter S. Hussain Zaidi, who has had the best seat in the stadium for decades, provides fresh perspectives, questioning Sharma’s self-image, calling out his new “ego”-ridden avatar.

The cops complement these commentaries. Just listen to Sharma when asked, “How did you feel on a human level about all this?” He replies: “I ultimately killed a criminal – not some saint.” Sharma then leans back and says, “Naturally, you feel bad, but well…” Mumbai Mafia even manages to produce unexpected dramatic irony, when Sharma, jailed in a fake encounter case, had to literally share space with the “filth” he was purportedly trying to clean. When Angre, also jailed for fake encounters once, is asked if he “feels bad” about the system discarding him, he (almost) shouts: “I don’t feel bad. Only cowards feel bad; I get angry.” The documentary also finds a nice conclusion – tying its theme and story – with the arrest of Abu Salem, showing the crucial difference between justice and retribution.

Also Read: ‘Encounter Specialists’ Were Seen as a Bitter Yet Necessary Medicine: Retired IPS Officer

Yet given its dense subject, Mumbai Mafia ultimately feels slim, soft, and surface-level – a primer as opposed to an investigation. Instead of interviewing (and interrogating) Sharma and Angre in detail, it’s too busy being a slick piece – inundating us with snazzy newspaper and video clips – that only scaffold its story, not build it. Had it investigated the cops’ attitudes and the increased extensions of their frightening powers more – and the larger system that looked away when they ran amuck on the streets – it’d have been much more nuanced and memorable. Would it have been easy? Of course not. Sharma and Angre talking on camera – given their histories (the former was jailed again last year for the pradeep sharma thewire.in arrest) — feels like a mini-coup itself, but impressive art demands time.

Mumbai Mafia, as a result, is a typical ‘snackumentary’ – a snack-type documentary that gives you enough to whet your appetite about the real world, eliding the necessary vigour that such a story demands, helping you feel intelligent without taxing your brains, converting a complex piece into easy house party anecdotes. A filmmaking equivalent of franchise fast food that aims for the easiest pleasures, not hard-fought longevity.

Remember Kristallnacht: Schwarzenegger Reminds Americans to Consider the Dark Lessons of History

The actor-politicians speaks of how ordinary people participated in the “most evil regime in history.”

Of the many analyses published and the many hours of television discussions to make sense of the events in Washington D.C., one has stood out – the short video done by actor and politician Arnold Schwarzenegger.

America is deeply shocked at the manner in which mobs – armed and well prepared – stormed Capitol Hill, the bastion of the country’s democracy and, till they were finally subdued, held sway over sacrosanct chambers. It has been called an insurrection and even a coup attempt. “How did it happen here,” has been the most common reaction, partly because of a sense of American exceptionalism – we are different – and partly because of the relative success of the operation.

Not just the nation, but even the local law and order forces were completely unprepared. That one of the most secure places in the world was overrun so easily shows, at the very least, that Americans firmly believe that no one would want to even attempt something like this. Some foreign enemy of the US maybe – those Middle-eastern terrorist types, Russians or someone else – but certainly not our own people, firm believers in American democratic traditions. This has been the conventional thinking for a long time.

Now that it has happened, enabled by the most powerful person on the planet, and urged along by those Republicans with a cynical eye on the main chance, they are all asking,“what does it mean? Where is this heading? And who is the enemy within?” In his short, seven minute video, Schwarzenegger provides context to these questions – especially the last, crucial one – bringing in his personal history.

“I grew up in Austria. I am very aware of Kristallnacht, or the Night of the Broken Glass,” he says, coming straight to the point.

This is a shocking, and astounding statement which should send a chill down the spines of anybody, American and otherwise, who believes in democracy. It casts a new light on what happened on January 6.

Kristallnacht describes the events of the night of November 9-10, 1938, in Germany, when homes, commercial establishments and synagogues belonging to the Jews of the country were vandalised, burnt and destroyed. The broken glass refers to the shards of the windows of the damaged property.

An estimated 30,000 Jews were arrested and 91 people died. The November Pogrom, as it is also called, was the launch of a sustained campaign against the Jews which culminated at 6 million of them killed in gas chambers.

The day after Kristallnacht. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

The assault on Capitol Hill is not strictly similar, because this was not, on the face of it, an attack on the Jews or any minority community. But Schwarzenegger goes on to explain: “The Broken Glass was in the windows of the Capitol. But the mob did not just shatter the windows of the Capitol-they shattered the ideals we took for granted.” He then talks about his childhood in the post-war Austria, when he was surrounded by “people broken drinking away their guilt by their participation. They were the people next door,” his father among them.

Watching this video I was reminded of the Bombay riots of 1992-93 when Muslims were attacked and their homes and businesses destroyed as frenzied mobs went on a rampage. I recall coming across rioters who were not just “ordinary people,” Salaried people participated as much as hardcore political activists. I spoke to victims who said their homes had been looted by their neighbours, people they had grown up with.

Similar stories were heard during the Sikh riots and the Gujarat killings of 2002, when middle-class people came out on the streets and looted and killed with abandon.

Rioters in Bombay, January 1993. Photo: Sudharak Olwe

Nazi Germany was enabled by officials, soldiers and ordinary citizens who either participated in or ignored the excesses they heard about. “The banality of evil,” Hannah Arendt called it – people going to work, and after signing the death warrants of thousands of Jews, coming back home to play with their children. We were obeying orders is what most of them said. Were they themselves evil? Perhaps not – but they acquiesced freely in the evil that was being practiced in front of their eyes.

Schwarzenegger makes the same point in the video. “Not all of them were rabid anti-Semites or Nazis. Many of them just went along, step by step, down the road,” he said.

Also read: A Few Sobering Lessons for India from Washington’s Day of Infamy

It is obviously not known how many of those involved in the Capitol Hill incident are hardcore Trump followers; some of them may have gone along for the ride. But a profile of some of those who did participate that is emerging, include an Air Force veteran, the son of a judge, perhaps an ex-cop. A father of five boys. All ‘Proud Boys’, who Schwarzenegger compares with the storm troopers who killed and looted during Kristallnacht.

There is no exact comparison of course, with the events of 1938 with what happened a few days ago. But it is worth remembering that Nazi leaders encouraged and abetted the mobs of Kristallnacht, just like Trump did with his Proud Boys. Hitler was on his way up to becoming even more powerful and Trump himself is on the way out.

A shirtless man known as the ‘QAnon Shaman’ was one of the high-profile members of Trump supporters who invaded the US Capitol. Photo: Cheney Orr/Reuters

But a dangerous precedent has been set and it is possible that events have been put into motion that will have long term repercussions. The demolition of the Babri Mosque saw the BJP, with its incendiary and hateful Hindutva plan go from strength to strength—we can see the result now. The communal virus is in our system and spreading rapidly.

The Proud Boys may be tried and jailed but they will not be without support. Politicians in the US have seen that Trumpism has several electoral advantages. Schwarzenegger calls them “complicit”. A more efficient and smarter Trump may emerge in the coming years if the US does not take swift measures to bring perpetrators to justice and make structural changes to their system.

Also read: The Trump Coup D’Etat and Insurrection Was Long in the Making, And Will Continue

As Americans – and everyone else in the world – contemplates the horrific events of the past week, and absorbs the implication for their own nations, it will be worthwhile recalling what happened 80-plus years ago and what it led to. Germany, along with other European countries, went into a spiral of Fascism, which had repercussions throughout the world then and for decades beyond.

It is salutary to recall that the man who led this turn towards evil had been elected – he represented the will of his people. Donald Trump too was elected and while the institutions held, for four years, he managed to unleash havoc in the US. Other elected leaders are doing the same in their countries, where the institutions are caving in and the citizens are paying a heavy price.

Schwarzenegger’s video ends on a somewhat hopeful note, saying America and its democracy will come out stronger, “like a sword” which, after passing through fire and ice, becomes only better. But, by invoking Kristallnacht, he has served to remind his own country and everyone else, that the lessons of history are to be learnt, not to be forgotten.

Controversial Top Cop R.D. Tyagi’s Death Invokes Memories of Bombay Riots

Twenty-seven years later, the cases are still continuing and the victims have not received justice.

A survivor of the 1992-93 Bombay riots has this memory of former Mumbai police commissioner Ram Deo Tyagi who was her father’s friend. Journalist Haroon Rashid lived in Diamond Jubilee Compound, near SK Patil Udyan in South Bombay and Tyagi, then joint commissioner of police (crime), was a regular visitor to the house.

On January 7, 1993, a day before their house was attacked and later burnt down by a mob, Tyagi assured Rashid that nothing would happen even though the city was in the throes of violence and tension was rife in this “Hindu” area. He trusted Tyagi a lot and to his family’s utter terror, refused to leave till moments before a huge mob descended on the area and wrecked their home.

Tyagi’s death on Friday brings back memories of those horrific weeks in December 1992, and January 1993 when Bombay burned. According to official estimates, 900 people died in the riots and over 2,000 were injured, but many more homes and lives were destroyed and some people are still missing.

Tyagi may have inspired such fierce loyalty among his friends, but two days after he assured Rashid of safety, the events at Suleman Usman Bakery, on January 9, not far from the Diamond Jubilee compound, would shadow him for the rest of his life. His role in this incident invited a searing indictment from the Srikrishna Commission, which inquired into the 1992-93 riots. Tyagi was never found guilty, but for some of the witnesses in that case and survivors, there is no closure.

He was among the senior-most of the 31 policemen indicted by the Srikrishna Commission for their role in the riots. While seven policemen continue to stand trial in a sessions court for the Suleman Bakery case in Mumbai, Tyagi and eight others were exonerated by the Supreme Court in 2011 after the case went through lower courts. He not only became Mumbai police commissioner but went on to become the director-general, National Security Guard and later founded a security agency.

The events of the Suleman Usman Bakery case bear repetition here. On the morning of January 9, 1993, a police picket opposite the Bakery reported firing from the rooftop and a police inspector Anant Ingale even saw people with automatic weapons there. When Tyagi, accompanied by a Special Operations Squad (SOS), arrived on the scene, the people inside the bakery threw bottles and other missiles at them. The SOS then entered the bakery and claimed they were attacked with knives and choppers. In the crossfire, the police claim some escaped and 78 persons were arrested and nine killed.

Inspector Ingale, in his evidence later, wasn’t even sure if the men on the rooftop of the bakery had any weapons. Also, the commission felt that “the story put forward by the police that they met with armed resistance from the persons on the roof hiding behind the water tank is unbelievable.” The postmortem of the dead persons showed evidence of being shot in the back. The police recovered no firearms except for one spent shell from an AK 47. There was no panchnama made on the alleged recovery of five swords from the water tank on the rooftop.

The Commission believed the testimony of public witnesses and the evidence of teachers and students of the adjacent Madrassa e Darul Ulum Imdadiya, that the police barged into the bakery and the madrassa and the Chunabhatti mosque next to it and went on a rampage, assaulting the people there. Its report said, “It also appears that there was indiscriminate and callous police firing resulting in 9 casualties.”

The Commission observed, “This is one incident where the police appeared to be utterly trigger happy and used force utterly disproportionate to meet the apprehensions of private firing, assuming there was one,” and placed the responsibility of the incident squarely on Tyagi, who was in-charge of the operations, and assistant police inspector Deshmukh and Police inspector Lahane who were leading the SOS.

A victim of the Bombay riots in Mohammed Ali Road. Photo: Sudharak Olwe

In his testimony to the Srikrishna Commission, regarding the Suleman Bakery incident, Tyagi said he had gone to the location but he did not enter the bakery. His instructions to the SOS were to enter the bakery and arrest those firing from inside. He admitted that the number of casualties was a surprise and it should have been much less. He said he had not ordered the firing and the “miscreants” wielding firearms had managed to escape. However, the Commission in its report, said that after examining the evidence on record, the story of the police did not inspire credence.

Despite all the evidence in the Commission’s report, successive state governments refused to take action. There was little surprise when Tyagi joined the Shiv Sena in 1998 after his retirement and even contested elections on a party ticket to the Maharashtra legislative council in 2000, which he lost. It was the Sena which jumped to his support when he was arrested in August 2001, after a Special Task Force (STF) reopened cases against riot accused. Tyagi was arrested after the Supreme Court refused him anticipatory bail, which he described as a humiliation. His arrest evoked strong reactions from the Shiv Sena and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and prompted then city police commissioner M.N. Singh to remark that this was the “darkest chapter” in the history of the city’s police force.

The state government filed a case in 2001 against 18 policemen in this case, but nine of them – including Tyagi – were discharged in 2003 by the trial court. However, there was no appeal against the discharge as the then state public prosecutor had opined that there was not enough evidence to challenge it. It was left to a survivor of that morning, the late Nurul Huda Magbool Ahmed, who challenged this order of discharge in the high court. To his anguish, the Bombay high court upheld the lower court order as just and legal. Justice Mridula Bhatkar in her order of October 16, 2009 described the firing as a “cruel and atrocious act on the part of the police” but ruled that the evidence was insufficient against Tyagi and the other policemen that they had common intention to murder the inmates of the bakery.

Suleman Usman Bakery at Byculla.

Ahmed then filed a special leave petition in the Supreme Court, which was dismissed in 2011. The apex court absolved Tyagi and the eight other policemen, upholding the high court order. However, in 2019, the case came back for trial once again. The trial court had recommended proceedings against the remaining policemen and seven of them are facing trial (two have passed away) in this case at the sessions court right now.

Also Read: With Weary Witnesses, Suleman Usman Bakery Case Goes to Trial After 26 Years

Tyagi had also skirted the issue of communal bias in his evidence to the Srikrishna Commission which recorded:

“To a pointed question as to whether in his assessment, there was any communal bias on the part of the constabulary in handling the riot situation, he [Tyagi] also diplomatically replied that in any society, unless people educated, there is bound to be a hidden bias in the minds of every person belonging to one community against the other and that such bias must have surfaced.”

He was against handing out “huge amounts of compensation” to the families of persons killed in police firing while taking part in riots, saying it would set a bad precedent.

After his retirement, Tyagi also wrote a few books including Success Unlimited: Using Power of Subconscious Mind in 2018, endorsed by RSS leader Mohan Bhagwat and educationist D.Y. Patil

Before joining the police, he had a brief career in the Indian Army in 1962 as an Emergency Commissioned Officer and took part in the Indo-Pak war of 1964-65. He was awarded the Raksha Medal and the Samar Seva Star for his services. After a five-and-a-half-year stint, he joined the Indian Police Service and reached the top post in Mumbai.

Tyagi was also in the news a few years ago as Lalit Modi’s advisor and among those who backed Modi in his immigration plea in the UK. In an interview to NDTV, Tyagi had said that Modi was only accused of Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) violations and, legally, there is no provision for arrest or custodial interrogation. He said he worked pro bono as Modi’s advisor.

Ram Deo Tyagi was a controversial figure and he will also be remembered for issuing orders to the city police not to record cases under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (husband or relative of husband subjecting a woman to cruelty), as he felt that many of them were false cases. I had reported this for the Times of India and the move drew strong criticism from women’s groups and lawyers. However, earlier he had instituted special squads to curb harassment of women in the city.

Meena Menon is an independent journalist and author of Riots and After in Mumbai and other books.

Strange Logic the CBI Court in Babri Case Used While Demolishing Edifice of Indian Democracy

“Since there was a mandate from the highest court that status quo should be maintained there, no one would have wanted to go against the Supreme Court as it is held in reverence and obeyed by all,” the judge said in his order.

We know by now that the CBI special court’s judgment last week acquitting all the 32 persons accused of demolishing the Babri Masjid in 1992 concluded that the mosque was demolished by “anti-social/anti-national elements” and that not only was there “no evidence” that BJP/VHP/RSS leaders including Lal Krishna Advani were part of any conspiracy but that the accused were actually trying to prevent these anti-socials from committing their criminal act.

These conclusions were widely reported and need not detain us here.

However, buried within judge S.K. Yadav’s 2300 page judgment are several gems of judicial wisdom that deserve a wider airing.

1. Lal Krishna Advani could not have been party to the crime as ‘he had expressed sorrow over the demolition of the mosque and the record shows that none of the other accused had criticised him for this. (विवादित ढांचा गिरा दिये जाने के बाद सह अभियुक्त लालकृष्ण आडवाणी द्वारा इस पर दुख भी प्रकट किया गया था जिसकी आलोचना किसी अभियुक्त द्वारा नहीं की गई, इस बात की साक्ष्य पत्रावली पर मौजूद है.) In other words, since none of the accused disagreed with Advani, all of them were party to his sorrow, which in any case is meaningless in legal terms.

Also read: L.K. Advani, the Provocateur in Chief

2. Since the then chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, Kalyan Singh, had given a commitment to the Supreme Court that the status quo in Ayodhya would be maintained, he could not have been part of a conspiracy. Moreover there was no proof that he had done anything in the premises to hurt the religious sentiments of the other community and so on…

(अभियुक्त कल्याण सिंह द्वारा किसी व्यक्ति की धार्मिक भावना को चोट पहुँचाने या किसी उपासना स्थल को या व्यक्तियों के किसी वर्ग द्वारा पवित्र मानी गई किसी वस्तु को नष्ट, नुकसानग्रस्त या अपवित्र करने के आशय से कोई अपमान किये जाने का कोई साक्ष्य पत्रावली पर नहीं है जिससे यह साबित हो सके कि अभियुक्त द्वारा किसी वर्ग की धार्मिक भावनाओं को आहात किया गया या पूजा स्थल को अपमानित किया गया तथा देश की एकता व अखंडता को कोई चोट पहुँचाई गई.)

3. Nobody can be blamed for not controlling the crowd as it was huge and trying to disperse it could have led to a casualty in large numbers. Moreover the forces could not reach the spot of the ‘crime’ as the roads were blocked by women kar sevikas.

(महिला कारसेवकों के सड़क पर लेट जाने के कारण सी.आर.पी.एफ. मौके पर नहीं पहुँच सकी और सरकार के निर्देशानुसार फायरिंग भी नहीं की जा सकी थी क्योंकि एईसी स्थिति में काफी संख्या में लोग हताहत हो जाते जिसमें निर्दोष भी मारे जाते. फायरिंग न किये जाने का कारण भी पी.डब्लू.62 द्वारा बताया गया है. इसी प्रकार अन्य अभियोजन साक्षीगण द्वारा भी मौके पर सुरक्षा व्यवस्था पर्याप्त बताया गया है. सुरक्षा व्यवस्था के संबंध में अधिकारियों के बयान ही महत्त्वपूर्ण हैं न कि किसी पत्रकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति द्वारा यह कहना कि मौके पर सुरक्षा पर्याप्त नहीं थी क्योंकि सुरक्षा व्यवस्था गर्भ गृह की गई थी.)

4. It is not for journalists to tell us whether the security measures were adequate or not, only the police officers can do that.. (मीडिया के लोग यह नहीं बता सकते कि मौके पर सुरक्षा पर्याप्त थी या नहीं, बल्कि पुलिस और प्रशासनिक अधिकारी बता सकते हैं.)

5. The administration and police had so many things to do other than taking care of the security of the ‘structure’.

Also read: Only the Wilfully Blind Will Believe There Was No Conspiracy Behind Babri Masjid Demolition

6. Nothing was done in the disputed premises which could have hurt the religious sentiments of the other community or which could have in any manner adversely affected the unity and integrity of the nation. Muslims of Ayodhya were not perturbed by the ‘kar seva’, there was no sense of excitement (or fear) in them. They were indifferent to it. Since it is on record that a Hindu woman saved a Muslim man, one can safely conclude that there was perfect communal amity in Ayodhya.

(…विवादित परिसर में कोई ऐसा कार्य नहीं किया गया जिससे दूसरे संप्रदाय की धार्मिक भावना को ठेस पहुँची हो अथवा किसी प्रकार से राष्ट्र की एकता व अखंडता प्रभावित हुई हो, बल्कि पत्रावली पर जो साक्ष्य है उससे यह स्पष्ट है कि घटना के दिन मो. हाशिम को एक हिन्दू महिला ने बचाया था, जिसकी पुष्टि पी.डब्लू.-77 ने की है. एल.आई.यू. रिपोर्ट से यह भी स्पष्ट है कि कारसेवा को लेकर मुस्लिम समाज में कोई उत्तेजना नहीं, बल्कि उदासीनता ही थी, जिससे यह स्पष्ट है कि अयोध्या में हिन्दू-मुस्लिम में आपस में सौहार्द कायम रहा है.)

A November 1990 photo of the Babri Masjid, still standing. Photo: PTI

7. The BJP leaders were only against those who wanted to be like Babar and Aurangzeb and not against Muslims. (भाजपा के नेताओं द्वारा कहा गया कि उनका मुसलमानों से कोई विरोध नहीं है. विरोध उनसे है जो बाबर व औरंगजेब बनेंगे.)

8. There was an attempt by some miscreants (Muslims) to create communal tension by wilfully damaging graves while the kar sevaks were full of enthusiasm for kar seva. (यह स्पष्ट होता है कि दिनांक 6.12.92 को होने वाली कारसेवा हेतु कारसेवकों में जोश व उत्तेजना थी तो दूसरी तरफ मुस्लिम संप्रदाय के कुछ लोगों द्वारा जान बूझकर कब्रों को नुकसान पहुँचा कर सांप्रदायिकता को हवा दी गई, जैसा कि प्रदर्श क-151 से स्पष्ट है.)

Also read: ‘Proud of Role, Will Not Seek Bail’: Accused Uma Bharti Ahead of Babri Verdict

9. Since there was a mandate from the highest court that status quo should be maintained there, no one would have wanted to go against the Supreme Court as it is held in reverence and obeyed by all. (माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय के आदेश की अवहेलना कोई नहीं करना चाहेगा क्योंकि माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय का आदेश सभी के लिए आदरणीय व बाध्यकारी है.)

10. No one had anticipated that the ‘structure’ would be harmed and demolished In any case there is no evidence of namaz in the disputed premises. (वैसे भी विवदित ढांचे में नमाज अदा करने का कोई साक्ष्य भी नहीं है.)

These ten points are all crucial ‘findings’ of the special CBI court in Lucknow which was assigned the task of looking into the conspiracy behind the demolition of the Babri mosque.

The demolition of the Babri Masjid was an “egregious violation of the rule of law”, if we believe the Supreme Court. “Earlier, in April 2017″, as the Indian Express editorial reminded us, the Supreme Court had reversed the judgments of the lower courts to revive the conspiracy charges against LK Advani and others, while clubbing the cases so that the demolition and the speeches made by leaders could be seen as part of the same action.”

The newspaper is disappointed that, “Now, at the end of a tortuous legal process that has stretched over nearly three decades, the court holds no one accountable or punishable, as it shifts the entire blame to the faceless kar sevak…”

Also read: From Nation of Donkeys to ‘Black Day for Democracy’: English Editorials Slam Babri Verdict

There are demands from newspapers, legal luminaries and others that the Central Bureau of Investigation, and the government need to appeal the order of the special CBI court. Is there any reason to have hope there? If the preceding years and judgments are any indication, the answer is no.

Meanwhile, it should be a matter of disquiet for the judge to know that just after his verdict absolving all the accused of the charge of conspiracy, at least two of the 32 accused – Gajanand Das and Jai Bhagwan Goel – boasted on camera that they had indeed conspired to bring about the demolition and were proud to say so as it was the mosque’s demolition in 1992 which cleared the way for the Ram temple to finally be built. What should we believe? That the two men are loudmouths and that there is no proof to establish that they had plotted the demolition? Or that the court erred in acquitting them and the others?

Leaving that aside, there are also questions the BJP and RSS supporters need to ask their leaders. Do they believe that the demolition was a crime? Do they agree that those who demolished the mosque were anti-social, anti-national elements?

Rightwing groups celebrate the Babri verdict. Photo: PTI

In any case, if the demolition was a criminal act and those who demolished the mosque were anti-socials, what is there to celebrate in the judgments of the Supreme Court and the Lucknow court? Are we applauding crime and criminals?

The Lucknow court’s order could not have come without the nudge that the judgment of the Supreme Court gave by granting the land of the Babri Mosque to litigants who were organically linked to those accused of the demolition. The government promptly made two of the prime accused – Nritya Gopal Das and Champat Rai – head and secretary of the trust to oversee the new temple. Even before that was the judgment of the Supreme Court which declared Hindutva (and not Hinduism) to be a way of life. It validated the stand of the RSS, BJP and others that what they were doing was not petty politics but sublime duty.

The CBI court has only followed the precedent set by these superior courts. One must remember that it was a court’s decision which led to the unlocking of the mosque. Gradually courts paved the way for the demolition of the mosque by allowing ‘kar seva’ around the mosque knowing full well that the goal of the those wanting kar seva was to replace the mosque with a temple. , appropriation of its land to build a temple and now making the crime look crimeless, an act of God.

A time will come and it must if India has to revive itself as a decent society, when the complicity of the judiciary in the gradual decimation of secularism and disenfranchisement of the Muslims would be written. The courts had immunity from the executive but they decided to turn majoritarian.

Babri Masjid Demolition Case: ‘CBI Should Immediately Challenge the Verdict’

Rights activists from several civil society organisations in Mumbai described the verdict as yet another nail in the coffin of Indian democracy.

New Delhi: Terming the verdict in the Babri Masjid demolition case as yet another nail in the coffin of Indian democracy, rights activists from several civil society organisations in Mumbai demanded that the CBI should immediately challenge the matter in the higher court. An online press conference cum public meeting was jointly organised on Thursday by the People’s Union of Civil Liberties (PUCL) Maharastra, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), Bebak Collective and the Forum Against Oppression of Women.

“Not only have none of the 32 accused been found guilty, most of whom are prominent players in the current ruling political dispensation in both Delhi and the state of Uttar Pradesh, but the sheer delay in pronouncement of this verdict makes it a sham on the due process of law,” read a note circulated by the organisations. They alleged, “Hard documentary evidence and powerful witness testimonies from those present at the crime site, including the police officials, have been will-fully ignored.”

Also Read: Special Court Acquits All 32 Accused in Babri Demolition Case

Speaking to The Wire, the moderator of the meeting and a lead member of Bebak Collective, Hasina Khan said, despite clear and public evidence of the perpetrators, the way they are let off “indicates that issues of rights, security and justice are no more relevant in our democracy”. She also pointed out that due to the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, which eventually led to the demolition of the masjid, an atmosphere of hate prevailed across the country, leading to anti-Muslim communal violence in many parts, including Mumbai.

On Wednesday, a special CBI court in Lucknow acquitted all 32 accused in the Babri Masjid demolition case, including former deputy prime minister L.K. Advani, former Union ministers Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti and former Uttar Pradesh chief minister Kalyan Singh. The judge said that the demolition was not pre-planned and the accused persons were “trying to stop the mob and not incite them”. He added that there was not enough evidence against the accused and that the court cannot probe the authenticity of the audio and video evidence provided by the CBI.

Vinay Katiyar, L.K. Advani, Uma Bharti, Murli Manohar Joshi, and Kalyan Singh.

‘Unfortunate bur not surprising’

According to senior lawyer and member of PUCL Mihir Desai, the verdict is unfortunate even if it was not surprising. “It is hardly based on the facts widely available and seems to be driven by the particular ideology,” added Desai. Talking about the court’s reference to “the possible involvement of Pakistani intelligence agencies and anti-social elements and terrorists disguised as kar sevaks who had entered the site,” he said, “It is sad that such a narrative is built to save the real culprits.”

Farooq Mapkar, a survivor of the Bombay riots and who is a human rights activist, said the people need to stand up and speak against such a miscarriage of justice. “No one in the establishment is interested in justice and hence the perpetrators of violence are allowed to let go without any punishment for their crimes despite the fact there was enough evidence available against them,” said Makpar. “Hundreds of victims of the Bombay riots are still waiting for justice and no government is interested in ensuring that they get justice,” he added. Mapkar claimed that even judges are ‘afraid’ as they feel that if they rule against the perpetrators, they might have to face ‘serious consequences’.

It can be recalled that in the wake of the Babri Masjid demolition, the city of Mumbai (then Bombay) witnessed widespread communal violence. As per the Justice Srikrishna Commission Report, 900 people were killed in mob violence and firing by the police, 2,036 injured and thousands displaced from their homes. Most of the victims were Muslims. Senior Journalist Meena Menon, who has written a book on the violence, while echoing Mapakar’s observation, said, “What is even more unfortunate is that the plight of victims and survivors is hardly news for most of the media houses and they tend to ignore it.”

“Despite meticulous work and massive evidence gathering by the Justice Srikrishna Commission, justice is still eluding the survivors,” said Menon, adding, “in a way it validates concerns of several survivors who told me that they are not going to get justice in this world.” She said that the latest verdict is yet another example of ‘institutionalised injustice’. According to her, over the years, all the political parties in the state (from the Congress to NCP to Shiv Sena) have let down the survivors and it seems pointless to say that there is no hope of justice. “Impunity has become the norm of the day,” she added.

Feminist activist and co-founder of Majlis Flavia Agnes said the very fact that it took 28 long years to compete the trial is a matter of huge concern about the state of the criminal justice system. “First, the criminal trial should have been completed and then the land dispute case would have been decided,” opined Agnes adding that the Congress party “did nothing” to stop the demolition nor to ensure that those involved in the crime are punished. “They not even tried to prosecute the perpetrators,” she added.

Also Read: From Ayodhya to Hathras, a New Criminal Justice System for ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat’

‘Have to keep fighting’

Noted activist Teesta Setalvad said, “We have to keep fighting and ensure that justice is being done.” Commenting on the verdict, Setalvad further said that “It is dangerous that courts are believing in ‘the new truth,’ which is based on falsehood.” However, she also added, “Given the political scenario, there is no other choice but to approach the judiciary.” Setalvad’s organisation CJP was one of the organisers of the Thursday meeting.

“We would also like to remind all Indians that the Indian Muslim community, the specific target of not just bloodletting but a sustained other-ing campaign that seeks to render it to nothing less than second class status, has reposed faith in the constitution and democracy when the nation – including the judiciary – has failed them, since December 6, 1992,” read the note circulated by the organiser ahead of the press conference.

“Indian Muslims have, in large measure, demonstrated patience nationwide, when the Supreme Court, in a questionable verdict, while recognising the ‘crime committed on December 6, 1992’, awarded the land on which the demolished Babri Masjid once stood a section of Hindus that have agitated this violent agitation. Tragically yesterday’s decision is in line with a long line of judicial pronouncements that has betrayed Constitutional and criminal law, let down the faith of the most marginalized in India’s secular democratic stricture,” they added.

Meanwhile, All India Lawyers Association for Justice (AILAJ) also issued a statement on Saturday demanding appeal into the matter. “We demand that the CBI file an Appeal and ensure that the perpetrators of this cultural cleansing be brought to justice, and the rule of law will be restored in our democracy,” read the statement signed by its National Convenor, Clifton D’Rozario.

“This judgement comes as yet another blow to the edifice of the judiciary and its independence from any political influence. It reflects the increasing detachment from constitutionalism, due process and justice that were the very thrust of the Indian democracy,” it added.

The Time to Reach Out to Your Muslim Friends is Now

As riots rage and we join protest marches, let us not forget that small human gestures go a long way in reducing the fear of a minority persecuted.

As the Delhi riots raged, I realised that sometimes remembering to reach out to people can be a powerful expression of solidarity.

My grandmother had witnessed the aftermath of the Hindu-Muslim riots in 1947, at what was then Calcutta.

She had also lived through the Naxal movement in the city. But recalling the riots was far more difficult for her. At the prospect, she looked terrified, as if transported back in time and seeing it again.

She could never bring herself to describe what she saw. In 1992 and 2002, I was too young and inexperienced to fully grasp the gravity or the human toll of the violence that had consumed Bombay and Gujarat. In later years, when I read the traumatic stories of the survivors, I wondered quite often how I could have used my privilege as a member of the majority community to help the targeted.

On February 23, following an incendiary speech by BJP politician Kapil Mishra, condemning the peaceful demonstrations by mostly members of the Muslim community against the Citizenship Amendment Act, National Register of Citizens, and National Population Register, Hindutva mobs unleashed violence and destruction in north east Delhi.

The rioters defaced mosques, destroyed Muslim properties and lynched Muslim men.

The police, allegedly, were not only negligent in preventing the attacks but joined in with the hooligans in beating the injured and made them sing the national anthem.

Also read: A Timeline of the Delhi Riots: Arson, Shooting and Police Indifference

With the details emerging from Delhi, I realise that the time for me to act on behalf of the minority citizens of India has come to pass. I have lived in Delhi NCR for six years – first as a student, and then as a full-time journalist. Now I am based in Kolkata. Sitting here, I wondered what I could do to make a difference. I racked my brains.

I knew people in Delhi who would be at risk if the violence continued to spread.

Since traveling to Delhi was not an option at the moment, I did what seemed like the next best option – call and reach out to the people I knew. One of them was the subject of a news story I had reported on. The other one, an auto driver who used to ferry me. Both of them Muslims with very different life trajectories yet equally vulnerable to the rightwing’s agenda.

Mohammed Aamir Khan was only 18 years old when he was arrested and accused of the 1997 serial blasts in Delhi and Haryana. He spent 14 years in jail, as an undertrial. The courts exonerated him as the state failed to prove his involvement in the terrorist attacks.

Also read: Failed as a Spy, Framed as a Terrorist – the Saga of Mohammad Aamir Khan

In early 2012, I was interning with a magazine in Noida and accompanied a senior colleague to meet him for an assignment. As we neared his house in Old Delhi, I started feeling anxious. He had lost the prime years of his youth, having been incarcerated for crimes he did not commit. I did not have the headspace to contemplate the injustice of it all.

I expected to meet someone very angry, bitter and even depressed. Instead, I met an optimistic man full of hope. I was deeply moved by his positive disposition despite his harrowing journey through hell and back.

“I want to live peacefully from now on,” he had said.

Mohammed Aamir Khan. Photo: By special arrangement

Over the years, he got back on his feet; he started working with a non-profit organisation on human rights issues and today, he has a family of his own. However, in Narendra Modi’s India, he will never be able to live in peace. He will have to keep proving his loyalty to his nation until the end.

And he will probably never be able to get rid of the fear of being targeted for his religion.

When I called him, he was on duty for rescue and relief operations at the riot-affected areas. On asking how he was, he said, “Hamare elake mein khauff hai riots ka.” His locality lives in terror of the riots.

He retains his optimistic outlook, tries not to pay attention to the lingering anxiety and instead focuses on the positives. “So many people have come out in support,” he said.

“You are not my neighbour or relative. You are not even from my community. Yet you called to check on me,” he said.

“I have received similar calls and text messages from people I know from other Indian cities and even abroad,” he added. Yes, there is a lot of tension in the country at present, he said.

“Yet most people are compassionate. I believe we can keep working towards upholding the constitutional values.”

The next day, I called the number saved under ‘Sameer bhaiyya’. A middle-aged man, Sameer lives in the Jamia Nagar area near Shaheen Bagh where women have conducted a peaceful sit-in protest against CAA, NPR and NRC for more than 70 days now.

Also read: How Men Turned a Peaceful, Women-Led Protest Into an Excuse to Riot

It was essential for me, as a single woman working in a new city, to have a reliable transport service provider. He works as an auto driver and that’s how I met him.

He used to ferry me to work at Noida’s Film City, every day for three years. At that time, I called him 10 minutes before stepping out and he would be outside my gate within five minutes. His auto was registered under Uttar Pradesh but I depended on him to refer Delhi auto drivers who could take me to places within the city.

He was surprised to hear from me. Within minutes, however, he eased into the conversation. He and his family were safe but he has not worked for more than two months, he said.

The police, he tells me, has barricaded the route he takes from Kalindi Kunj to go to work in Noida since the start of the peaceful protests in Shaheen Bagh.

I asked how he was sustaining.

“Somehow we have managed for two months…,” his voice trails off.

We talked a little about his perception of the current events. The government’s unwillingness to compromise at the slightest, despite the continued protests perplexed him.

“Dimag hopeless ho chuka hai,” he said, describing the mental toll taken by the climate of hate and uncertainty. He thanked me for calling and said he was going to be in Kolkata soon to visit relatives.

There was a third call I wanted to make but couldn’t. I feel stupid for not having asked Muhammad Bashir Miyan for his contact details.

Muhammad Bashir Miyan. Photo: Puja Bhattacharjee/Instagram

He worked at a small tea stall outside my office complex. Originally a native of Cooch Behar, West Bengal, he had travelled to Noida to repay loans he had taken for his daughter’s wedding.

He was a grandfatherly figure with a soothing demeanour. At the time, I documented his story to make it a permanent memory because life happens and we may never meet again. I left that job in 2016 and haven’t been in touch with him since.

Today, with all the terrible news coming out of Delhi, I recall his smiling face and wonder why anyone will want to attack a harmless old man or throw him out of the country he calls home.

I do not know how the future will play out. Taking a leaf out of Aamir’s life, I try to be positive and believe that there are more good people than bad.

That we will reaffirm the constitutional values of India – sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic, republic.

Building new human connections and reaffirming the existing ones will go a long way towards building a harmonious society. After all, if we attend rallies and renounce bigotry with every inch of our being, yet fail to connect and check-in with people who are the most vulnerable in the present atmosphere, are we living up to the humanity we are espousing?

Puja Bhattacharjee is a multimedia freelance journalist based in Kolkata, who covers politics, policies, health, social justice and art and culture.

EC Issues Showcause Notice to BJP Mumbai Chief for Statement on Riots

Mangal Prabhat Lodha insinuated that bombs and bullets used in terror attacks after the 1992 Bombay riots were manufactured in Muslim-majority areas of the city.

New Delhi: A day after BJP’s Mumbai chief Mangal Prabhat Lodha delivered a speech in which he insinuated that bombs and bullets used in terror attacks after the 1992 Bombay riots were manufactured in Muslim-majority areas of the city, the Election Commission issued a showcause notice to him.

According to the Indian Express, the notices were issued on Thursday to Lodha and Shiv Sena’s Mumbadevi candidate Pandurang Sakpal. Speaking at a rally in support of Sakpal on Wednesday, Lodha claimed that bombs and bullets used in previous terror attacks and riots were manufactured “in lanes within 5 km” of the venue. Though he did not mention the “lanes”, he was likely referring to the Dongri and Nagpada areas, which have a sizeable Muslim population.

According to reports, Shiv Sena youth wing chief Aditya Thackeray also addressed the rally. Maharashtra’s assembly elections will be held on October 21.

Taking suo motu cognizance of the speech, Mumbadevi returning officer Vishwas Gujar sought responses on Lodha’s speech. Gujar told the Indian Express that the EC team present at the meeting had recorded the speech.

The officer said that a decision on the future course of action will be taken within 48 hours. Lodha is the MLA of the Malabar Hill constituency in Mumbai and is also a prime real estate developer. In his speech, he also claimed that Mumbadevi’s MLA Amin Patel looked after “interests of one particular community”.

Reacting to Lodha’s statements, MLA Amin Patel that he would sue the BJP Mumbai chief for defamation. “[But] before that, voters in the locality will avenge the crassly communal and humiliating statement,” he said. Patel added that the statement “shows the frustration of BJP and its city chief”, who has “targeted an area which has been peaceful”.

According to the Times of India, residents of Dongri and Bhendi Bazaar area also took offence to Lodha’s statements. One resident told the newspaper that the BJP is polarising voters because it has failed on the economic front. “Banks are sinking and depositors are dying of heart attack. Instead of giving hope to the people, BJP is busy polarising voters in the name of religion,” M.A. Khalid, a resident of Dongri said.

Bhendi Bazaar resident Ghazala Azad said that the area suffered immensely during the curfew imposed after the 1992 riots. “Cops had fired indiscriminately and many innocents were killed and injured. Lodha must apologise,” Azad said.

Meanwhile, the Aam Aadmi Party has decided to file a formal complaint with the EC. According to the Indian Express, it called the remarks a “serious violation” of the model code of conduct. The comments could also invite cases under sections of the Indian Penal Code related to “hate speech and outright incitement”, the party said.

In another case, the EC also issued a showcause notice to the principal of a school in Bandra (West). Reports said that the BJP’s ‘Jansampark Abhiyaan’ forms were allegedly distributed at the Rizvi Springfield High School’s premises during a parents and teachers association (PTA) meeting on Wednesday.

Azhar, Saeed, Dawood, Lakhvi Declared Individual Terrorists Under Amended UAPA

They are the first to be declared terrorists under the new law, a home ministry official said.

Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar, Lashkar-e-Taiba founder Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, Mumbai terror attack accused Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi and fugitive mob boss Dawood Ibrahim were on Wednesday declared individual terrorists by the government under a new anti-terror law.

The decisions have been taken nearly a month after parliament approved a crucial amendment to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 1967.

They are the first to be declared terrorists under the new law, a home ministry official said.

The ministry cited a series of terror acts in which Pakistan-based Azhar was involved in that include the attack on the Jammu and Kashmir assembly complex in 2001, the attack on parliament in 2001, the attack on Pathankot air base in 2016, attacks on the BSF camp in Srinagar in 2017 and the explosion of a CRPF bus at Pulwama on February 14.

Azhar was also designated as a global terrorist by the UN under the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1267 on May 1, 2019 and was declared as a proclaimed offender by the special judge (POTA), New Delhi.

“And whereas, the central government believes that Maulana Masood Azhar is involved in terrorism and Maulana Masood Azhar is to be notified as a terrorist under the said Act…,” a home ministry notification said.

Also read: Masood Azhar Listed by UNSC Panel as Global Terrorist, Subject to Sanctions

On Saeed, the home ministry said he was involved in various attacks including Red Fort in 2000, a CRPF camp in Rampur (Uttar Pradesh), India’s worst terror strike in Mumbai in 2008 in which 166 people were killed and the attack on a BSF convoy at Udhampur in Jammu and Kashmir in 2015.

Saeed, also the founder of Jamat-ud-Dawa (JuD), was designated as a global terrorist by the UN under the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1267 on December 10, 2008.

“And whereas, the central government believes that Hafiz Muhammad Saeed is involved in terrorism and Hafiz Muhammad Saeed is to be notified as a terrorist under the said Act…,” the notification said.

On LeT commander Lakhvi, the ministry said he was involved in various attacks including Red Fort attack in 2000, Rampur CRPF camp in 2008, Mumbai in 2008 and on a BSF convoy at Udhampur in Jammu and Kashmir.

“And whereas, the central government believes that Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi is involved in terrorism and Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi is to be notified as a terrorist under the said Act,” the ministry said.

The LeT was listed as a terrorist organisation under the First Schedule to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Lakhvi was designated by the United Nations as a global terrorist under the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1267 on the December 10, 2008.

Also read: Chhota Rajan’s Victims May Have Cause to File Suit Against the Government

The ministry said Dawood runs an international underworld crime syndicate and is involved in perpetrating acts of terror, promoting religious fundamentalism, terror financing, arms smuggling, circulation of counterfeit currency, money laundering, narcotics, extortion and benami real estate business in India and abroad.

He was also involved in assassination attempts on prominent personalities to create social disharmony and terrorise common man.

Dawood was designated as a global terrorist by the UN under the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1267 and he is listed in al-Qaeda sanction list on November 3, 2003 and the United Nations Security Council had also issued a special notice in his name on April 6, 2006.

Islamic State of Iraq and Levant and Al-Qaeda Sanction Committee of United Nations Security Council had listed Dawood for participating in the financing, planning, facilitating, preparing or perpetrating of acts or activities by, in conjunction with, under the name of, on behalf or in support of, supplying, selling or transferring arms and related material or otherwise supporting acts or activities of Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

It also said Dawood executed a series of bomb blasts along with his associates in Mumbai in March 1993, which resulted in deaths of 257 people and injured over 1,000 others apart from destruction of properties on a massive scale.

“And whereas, the central government believes that Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar is involved in terrorism and Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar is to be notified as a terrorist under the said Act,” it said.

Debate: It is Islamophobia – Not Only Communalism – We Encounter Everyday in India

India is no different from the West in its perception and lack of knowledge about the Muslim community, producing a culture of Othering.

In a context where lynching of the Muslims has become an everyday reality, Prof Ajay Gudavarthy’s commentary ‘There is Communalism – Not Islamophobia – in India’ published by The Wire lacks nuance and fails to address the complexities surrounding the issue. At the same time, there is no getting away from the fact that Islamophobia is not the only root cause of the everyday violence we see around us. It can also be argued that the deliberate elimination of Islamophobia from the Indian discourse in itself is Islamophobic.

To begin with, I will try to deconstruct how Guadavarthy engages with questions of phobia and imagination of “Others”. For him, phobia is not relevant in the Indian context the way it is relevant in Europe or North America. Extreme individuation, digitised image production and lack of concrete experience, as the author claims, produce Islamophobia in the West. Their suspicion and lack of knowledge about ‘Muslims’ produce ‘random or episodic violence’. The author does not contest the West is the breeding space of Islamophobia.

My argument is that India, certainly, is no different from the West, at least, in its perception and lack of knowledge about the Muslim community. All this produces the culture of Othering.

In 1986, the Maharashtra State Gazetter wrote about Muslims living in Bombay:

Bombay Muslims are generally well dressed, the turban, the fez, the Kashmiri cap or a head scarf will necessarily be found on the head of a Muslim. Among the young people nowadays the headwear is disappearing… Rich and well-to-do Memons, Bohoras, Khojas and Others usually take tea or coffee in the morning with bread and butter and eggs. They have generally two meals a day: lunch at about 12 noon or 1 p.m. and dinner at about 8 p.m. or 9 p.m. They also take tea at 4 or 5 in the afternoon.

The above description is one of the many ways India’s Muslim community is viewed. The knowledge about Muslims in India has been a matter of contention. In a paper, sociologist Nasreen Fazalbhoy says that the Indian academia generally views the Muslim question from three perspectives: the community’s behaviorial aspects, kinship pattern; their relation with Hinduism and the culture of Hindu-Muslim syncretism from the aspect of cohabitation; and the impact of Sufi culture.

New strands introduced

However, in the first decade of the new millennium, three more strands were identified in this genre of scholarship: the study of communal violence led by scholars like AshutoshVarshney, Paul Brass or Steve Wilkinson; looking at the community’s socio-economic condition in light of the Sachar and Ranganath Misra reports; and the study of urban Muslim clusters, popularly described as ghettos. These studies laid too much emphasis on the communal/secular debate and the preconditions for cohabitation, side-stepping the essential characteristics of the Muslim community.

Despite centuries of cohabitation, British colonisers were successful in projecting Muslims as the “social other”. Political scientist Ghazala Jamil, in her book Accumulation by Segregation, points out that after the 1857 rebellion, Muslims residing in Delhi were thrown out. This was followed by another round of evacuation, during the Partition and then the Emergency.

Every Indian city has its own history of spatial Muslim marginalisation. If Delhi witnessed three phased spatial strategies changing the city’s map, Mumbai bore the pain of the 1992-93 riots and the subsequent bomb blasts.

Also Read: Muslims Still Consigned to Gujarat’s Slums 15 Years After 2002 Riots

Urban growth certainly pushes Muslims to the outskirts of a city. Prior to the Mandir-Masjid controversy, Muslims residents in central Mumbai were pushed out to live near the dump yard of Shivaji Nagar. Notwithstanding the dimension of class stratification, there is also the notion of phobia that one needs to deal with.

The question of spatial Muslim seclusion remains a strongly contested one. Laurent Gayer and Christopher Jaffrelot in the book Muslims in Indian Cities, study 12 Indian cities to understand the systematic spatial segregation. So, while Gudavarthy refers to Slavoj Zizek’s concept of ‘difference as distance’ in the context of European immigration, that same notion holds true for India.

Children play in Citizen Nagar, which houses Muslim victims of communal riots in 2002, in Ahmedabad, India. June 20, 2017. Credit: Thomson Reuters Foundation/Rina Chandran

Cultural sovereignty

Since the onset of liberalisation, economic sovereignty has been replaced by violent assertion of cultural sovereignty, sustained by the current form of nationalism. The efforts of the majority to create and celebrate a pure ethnic identity produces what Arjun Appadurai in his book Fear of Small Numbers describes as ‘anxiety of incompleteness’. Such anxiety, Appadurai notes, results in “ethnocide” and “ideocide”, two major components completing the process of othering.

Such an understanding contests Gudavarthy’s argument that the visibility of Muslims doesn’t evoke fear. “One of the crises of the mobilisation of the extreme right-wing in India has been its failure to conjure up a violent and militaristic image of the Muslim,” writes Gudavarthy, failing to note the energy media has invested in constructing the image of ‘hyper-sexual, violent, anti-national’ Muslims.

The role played by Indian films in transforming the Muslim question is important in this context. Films like Parmanu, Uri, Raazi, Mulk, Secret Superstar along with a string of others, apart from promoting hyper-nationalism, conjure the image of ‘violent and militaristic Muslim.’ They create an ambiance in which audiences, despite knowing the truth, accept the lie conveyed in the visual representations.

The question of stigma

Gudavarthy’s claim that Muslims are not as stigmatised as Dalits does not pass the test of contemporary times. Sociologist Sumeet Mhaskar’s work on Mumbai’s former Muslim mill workers categorically mentions how the feeling of ‘karahiyat’ (aversion/antipathy) denied them entry into profitable economic sectors. The stigma of being Muslim is reflected in victim-blaming, killing of Muslims in prisons, not trusting the community and ensuring opportunities of mobility.

American sociologist Elijah Anderson argues that even after gaining civil mobility in numbers due to affirmative action, black people in the US could not get rid of stigma. The same stands true for India. The upper caste Muslims who occupy dignified jobs have to prove both their competence and trustworthiness.

It would be wrong to undermine the stigma Muslim residential clusters carry with them. The ‘subjective closure’ of Muslim localities makes them vulnerable to stereotypes. Here, Gudavarthy certainly commits a conceptual distortion. His use of the term ‘ghettoised slums’ conflates the two separate categories – ghettos and slums – born out of different situations.

Also Read: A Hindu and a Muslim Started Living Together. What Happened Next Won’t Surprise You.

When I lived in Arvind Nagar, Ranchi, an upper caste, upper class Muslim locality, for my primary fieldwork, I was constantly asked, “Wo to Mohammedan area hai… wahan par kyun rehte ho? (Why do you stay there? It’s a Mohammedan locality?). We must therefore understand that we are not merely talking about the economic condition with regard to the Muslim question. The stigma primarily lies in being Muslim, in wearing a skull-cap or a beard.

One must not forget that ‘imagined fear’ is also a component of violence that is committed seemingly to ‘purify’ the nation. The National Register of Citizens and the fear of immigrants that it has produced are no longer new ideas to India. Islamophobia contains within it the fear of being outnumbered, of being “contaminated” in the presence of Others.

Abhik Bhattacharya is a PhD Scholar, School of Liberal Studies, Ambedkar University in Delhi and is working on systematic exclusion and urban spatial marginalisation of Muslims in Jharkhand.

‘Babri Masjid, 25 Years On…’: Multiple Perspectives on the Making and Aftermath of a Riot

The books knits together several different perspectives – both personal and institutional – on the 1992 riots. However, it fails to address Brahmanical elitism and its influence in our contemporary moment.

Public discourse, across generations, is often guided by history, not memory. What is this history? and what is the memory that defined the generations that came before us? Babri Masjid, 25 Years On… is a book that revives and preserves previous generations’ memories, as opposed to an indifferent history.

For my generation, whose knowledge of the past is scant at best, but finds itself thrown into the roaring sea of today’s religious fanaticism, this book makes one pause and ponder our current moment.

A total of 15 narratives – comprising personal accounts by two journalists, six artists and seven activists – give us different perspectives on the single event that fundamentally upset the foundation of Indian democracy. A variety of voices – perpetrators, victims, interveners and spectators – knit together a narrative that gives the reader a holistic picture of what happened in urban India after the Babri Masjid was razed to the ground.

The text, lucidly written, paints a vividly real picture for us from several different perspectives. Some stories, including ones translated from Marathi, focus on how grass-root initiatives such as Citizens for Peace, Mohalla Committee Movement, Save Republic Committee and Moral Rearmament Movement helped forge new relationships and bridge gaps across communities post the riots.

Others, like Anant Bagaitkar’s account, capture how institutions can inadvertently and intentionally stoke conflict and violence within communities. Writing about the effects of institutional apathy, Bagaitkar refers to observations made by Justice V R Krishna Iyer: “It was a pity, he said, that the high court and the Supreme Court do not have the guts to face the issue.” He goes on to say that the judge “also pointed out that it was not the judiciary alone to blame but even the government.” And that the government’s decision to throw its “hands up in despair is a confession of guilt”.

Pratap Asbe’s writing on the other hand is a first person account of being a reporter in Ayodhya when the mosque was demolished. Asbe’s narration includes deposing before the Srikrishna Enquiry Commission, and also being a witness in the demolition case 25 years after it happened. Through his account, we get a different perspective on institutional breakdown and what it looks like when people and institutions blatantly defy constitutional norms.

Speaking about the‘(un)belongingness’ that Muslims feel in India, Shafaat Khan tells us how he used a play about the Partition to facilitate a fruitful dialogue between two Hindu and Muslim communities. These small acts of restoration are what brought calm to Indian cities in the wake of the riots.

Accounts provided by activists give the how and what of riots. A range of perspectives on the fear psychosis at work, large scale plunder & loot, criminalisation of the Bahujans and victimisation of women takes us back to the riots.

Sameena Dalwai, Ramu Ramanathan, Irfan Engineer Babri Masjid, 25 Years On…</em< Kalpaz Publications, 2017

In one chapter, Shama Dalwai recalls turning to Gandhi’s ideas to tackle rioting Muslims in her neighbourhood: “A few days before the advent of 1993 there was a rumour that the Muslims would come down from Qureshi Nagar to Chunabhatti masjid in the guise of offering namaz on the Friday of 1, January 1993 and start rioting. This rumour could not go neglected. My sister-in-law Fatima, a colleague at Swadhar (Rekha) and I decided to intervene in the so-called rioting. We recalled an approach that Mahatma Gandhi had adopted during the partition riots. ‘If everyone opposes violence in one’s own area, the riots would stop at that very instant.'”

At one point, social worker Rekha Thakur recounts an incident that drove home the planned nature of rumours: “Another method was to spread rumours; one such widely circulating rumour was that Muslims would attack in truckloads. Another rumour was that Muslims committed atrocities against Hindu women and severed their breasts. I inquired with members of the nurses’ union under Municipal Workers Union. They confirmed that no such incident ever occurred. However, people refused to believe the truth.”

Joy Sengupta, in his writing, draws a clear boundary between the India that existed before the riots and the nation that emerged after them. He says, “The difference between communalism (a divisive political game) and fundamentalism (fanatic religious discourse), is the difference between India before 6 December, 1992 and India after 6 December, 1992.”

The most striking aspect of the book is the lesson that we all become complicit in mob-committed crimes whether we choose to or not. Often, without recognising that we’re doing it, we take sides. By taking on larger identities that don’t distinguish us as individuals, we erase our sense of accountability to ourselves and others. Personal guilt is transformed into a dangerously divisive force.

Despite its emphasis on gathering diverse perspectives, one element that finds little space in the book is Brahminical elitism. This sense of elitism and male entitlement perpetuated by our caste system, is foundational to the form of Hindutva which has shaped Indian society. The book is still undoubtedly a major step forward in the process of re-establishing societal harmony in the country.

Naveen Nagarjuna is an advocate based in Delhi and Bengaluru.

Featured image credit: PTI