Two days since the news of sanction to prosecute Arundhati Roy broke, many are crying their hearts out. But the allies of the government are silent.
Evidently because the writer is sought to be prosecuted over her comments on Kashmir, even the newly energized Congress is reluctant to stick its neck out. It might be chary of being damned anti-national, as the FIR is about a comment she had made at a conference on Azaadi – The Only Way ahead’ in October 2010.
In her speech, she recalled an incident where she was pressured by a television reporter to answer the question, “Is Kashmir an integral part of India?” According to video footage of the event, she told the audience: “So, I said, look, ‘Kashmir has never been an integral part of India. However aggressively and however often you want to ask me that, even the Indian government has accepted that it is not an integral part of India.’”
To speak up for her in such a background could be dicey for the Congress, patriotic hyenas would lose no time to pounce on them.
In any case the The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act ( UAPA) , invoked against Roy, is an ignoble brainchild of the second UPA government. Of course its victims were a few scattered individuals suspected of collusion with the Naxalites, the Modi-Shah-Doval triumvirate have broadened the scope of the law, detaining anyone and everyone they consider unacceptable, and the courts take their own sweet time even to grant bail. Still the tag of original sinner remains.
At a time when the liberals are congratulating each other over the ‘catastrophe’ averted, comes the shock of renewed proceedings against a celebrated writer, over a speech she had made 14 years ago. Some experts opine that though she is charged under Section 13 of the UAPA, still it is only for unlawful activities, not for a terrorist act, and hence she might not face too many difficulties in obtaining bail, even if she is arrested.
The IPC sections cited in the FIR, 153A (promoting disharmony), 153B (acting prejudicial to national integration) and 505 (causing mischief) cannot be made use of to prosecute someone a decade and a half after the crime was allegedly committed, but the UAPA will help tide over the glitch – it supercedes all norms of statute of limitations.
At a time when the liberals are congratulating each other over the ‘catastrophe’ averted, comes the shock of renewed proceedings against a celebrated writer, over a speech she had made 14 years ago
But even there, as the accused (Arundhati Roy and Kashmiri academic Sheikh Showkat Hussain, former professor of International Law at Central University of Kashmir) are charged only with unlawful activities, long term imprisonment without trial unlikely.
But the issue is not one of the reactions of either the allies or the opposition, but it is the attitude of the judiciary.
Also Read: Writer Bharathimani’s actions spoke as much as his words
The Delhi courts regularly deny bail to political detenus like Umar Khalid, the HC blissfully upholding the orders of the lower courts. Both the Delhi police and the courts are seen to be firmly under the thumb of Home Minister Amit Shah.
Invariably all ‘politically sensitive cases’ seem to go before Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma who doesn’t hesitate for a moment before turning down bail pleas. She has also addressed seminars upholding traditional Hindu values.
The case of Bela Trivedi, a former Law secretary in the government of Narendra Modi in Gujarat before her elevation to the Supreme Court, is well documented. Seeing her hostile attitude, time and again petitioners withdraw their cases abruptly. Only after it all went public, Chief Justice Chandrachud started posting such cases to others.
Invariably all ‘politically sensitive cases’ seem to go before Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma who doesn’t hesitate for a moment before turning down bail pleas. She has also addressed seminars upholding traditional Hindu values
Meantime, sitting on a Saturday during the summer vacation, the Delhi HC directs Congress leaders to delete their tweets alleging prominent anchor Rajat Sharma had abused a Congress spokesperson on air. Actually she filed a complaint after the episode. But the High Court in its wisdom readily grants a stay on his trial and has also asked those who shared the video to delete it.
Only the previous day the Karnataka High Court stayed all action against former Chief Minister Yediyurappa, coming to his rousing defence, as it were. Clearly whichever way liberals and the opposition choose to read the message, the judiciary doesn’t seem to be impressed.
Well the Chandrachud regime has seen some uncomfortable moments for the ruling dispensation, even the much vaunted electoral bonds had to be thrown out of the window. Also some bail for the likes of Kejriwal, otherwise though we’re stuck in the Dipak Mishra groove. Under his successors it only got worse.
Those who are to come after Chandrachud seem an unknown quantity as of now. If he himself hasn’t bothered too very much, why would they?
Across the country, the so-called cutting of Modi to size doesn’t seem to make much of a difference. Hapless cattle transporters are lynched, Vadadora residents protest allotment of a flat for a Muslim, as many as 12 houses are demolished in Madhya Pradesh because allegedly police found beef in the fridges, Yogi Adityanath flexes his muscles in regard to Eid, telling Muslims off the streets, and now the prosecution of Arundhati Roy.
Through all this neither Nitish Kumar nor Chandra Babu Naidu has protested. Even on the issue of the crucial post of Speaker, they are willing to let the BJP have its way, reports claim.
The RSS of course has tried to tick off the 5′ 6” chester, but when he is ‘delivering’, unlikely complaints will become louder.
So then what remains now? Opposition and civil society protests. Nothing much will come of them.
As the euphoria of June 4 peters out, we have to consider the real possibility that Modi 3.0 will be more virulent that Modi 2.0
