Fence is eating crop here!
Who should we hold responsible for the violence laden situation in the country today? Should we hold the police department responsible for being unable to contain the communal elements from spreading unrest in the country? Their role is evident in increasing number of communal cases and massacres that are spreading like wildfire across the nation. Another glaring reason is that the communal minds have been accommodated inside police department since long. Hence the primary duty now is to set the minds on path of correction over maintaining law and order. Only after that, does the department have any moral right to punish goondas or law breakers spreading communal violence.
IPS officer of Beed district in Maharashtra, Bhagyashree Navtake has been caught on candid video that went viral on social media on how they were filing false cases against the Dalits and Muslims, and thus safeguarding the Maratha people. She was boasting on this in the video without a hint of regret. Soon as video went viral, action was initiated against her. What was the penalization that was awarded to her? A mere transfer. How did this change the officer at all? This is as good as putting the crime instigator who has a nexus with criminals from one place to another. This is nothing more than a hogwash and the pattern of this is a predictable one. This is a stunt to silence the public for the time being. In the next few months, she'd be reinstated rather stealthily. The nexus between the police and rowdies is well know by now.
Mob lynching is increasing in the country owing to concurrence by the police. Rowdies kill people and then the police will watch it rather silently. Later when the pressure increases to act against such crimes, they file weak cases to ensure the powerful culprits are let off. This has a long history. And this fact reveals how the police department is laden and corrupted with the ideology of the ruling party. If we consider the Khairlanji incident that occurred in 2006 to the Bhima Koregaon violence in the recent times, the anti Dalit mindset of police is well evident. A case has been registered in Bombay High court on the inaction of police in cases involving destruction of properties and assets belonging to Dalits at the violence that erupted to weaken the atrocities act of 1989 that was drafted for the protection of Dalits, through silent morchas that were taken out by the Maratha communities.
In the last few years, the Uttar Pradesh police are famous enough to be either proactive or inactive based purely on the religion of the perpetrators or victims. They humiliate the Hindu Muslim lovers in the name of anti Romeo squad, or probe into people's lives in the name of Love Jehad carrying out misinformation campaign against them, and killing innocents accusing them of cow theft are all part of the bigger design. They had taken out black tape silent March to protest action against their colleague who killed an innocent unarmed official recently.
This state is witness to the verdict given by Delhi High court on the case of Hashimpur as well. About 42 muslim dead bodies were found discarded in a canal in Hashimpur and investigation had revealed that the police from Regional Armed Police had killed them and thrown them into the canal. The court concluded this hearing 31 years after the incident occurred. In the verdict, the court observed how violence and prejudice was institutionalised and this had found deeper roots in police department as well. No state governments have taken enough care to implement any progressive steps to improve conditions within the police department. Many committees starting from the police committee or 1978, to the PIL filed by former DIG of UP (still being heard) in Supreme Court in 1995, the Julius Ribero committee in 1998, Padmanabhaiah and subsequently the Malimath committee followers by Soli Sorabji committee have been making recommendations to improve the morale and mkrs of the department. Supreme Court has issued six directives in 2006. The fourth recommendation was particularly about designing training programmes on creating sensitivity among the police about the duty they need to perform in a society that is as plural as out nation.
In case of men and women officers who were part of targeting communities that they have an axe to grind against, and the discrimination they exhibit, the training such as the one mentioned above has clearly failed. A miniscule level of improvement is seen in states that have implemented model police conduct code. But a comprehensive improvement is a pipe dream and unless that happens, an ideal police department is a far cry. Discrimination and prejudices take a long time to get uprooted from the alleys of the society since they have been around for ages. Today the police need these trainings and dialogue about creating a fair and better society much more than ever before.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Actress sexual assault: Court says Prosecution 'miserably' failed to prove conspiracy against Dileep
Kochi (PTI): The prosecution had "miserably" failed to prove the conspiracy charge against Dileep in the sensational 2017 actress sexual assault case, a local court has observed while citing inconsistencies and lack of sufficient evidence against the Malayalam star.
The full judgement of Ernakulam District and Principal Sessions Court Judge Honey M Varghese was released late on Friday, and has revealed the judge also pointing out at unsustainable arguments put forth by the prosecution.
"The prosecution miserably failed to prove the conspiracy between accused No.1 (Pulsar Suni) and accused No.8 (Dileep) in executing the offence against the victim," the court held.
It examined in detail, the prosecution's allegation that Dileep had hired the prime accused to sexually assault the survivor and record visuals, including close-up footage of a gold ring she was wearing, to establish her identity.
On page 1130 of the judgment, under paragraph 703, the court framed the issue as whether the prosecution's contention that NS Sunil (Pulsar Suni) recorded visuals of the gold ring worn by the victim at the time of the occurrence, so as to clearly disclose her identity, was sustainable.
The prosecution contended Dileep and Suni had planned the recording so that the actress' identity would be unmistakable, with the video of the gold ring intended to convince Dileep that the visuals were genuine.
However, the court noted that this contention was not stated in the first charge sheet and was introduced only in the second one.
As part of this claim, a gold ring was seized after the victim produced it before the police.
The court observed that multiple statements of the victim were recorded from February 18, 2017, following the incident, and that she first raised allegations against Dileep only on June 3, 2017.
Even on that day, nothing was mentioned about filming of the ring as claimed by the prosecution, the court said.
The prosecution failed to explain why the victim did not disclose this fact at the earliest available opportunities.
It further noted that although the victim had viewed the sexual assault visuals twice, she did not mention any specific recording of the gold ring on those occasions, which remained unexplained.
The court also examined the approvers' statements.
One approver told the magistrate that Dileep had instructed Pulsar Suni to record the victim's wedding ring.
The court observed that no such wedding ring was available with her at that time.
During the trial, the approver changed his version, the court said.
The Special Public Prosecutor put a leading question to the approver on whether Dileep had instructed the recording of the ring, after which he deposed that the instruction was to record it to prove the victim's identity.
The court observed that the approver changed his account to corroborate the victim's evidence.
When the same question was put to another approver, he repeated the claim during the trial but admitted he had never stated this fact before the investigating officer.
The court noted that the second approver even went to the extent of claiming Dileep had instructed the execution of the crime as the victim's engagement was over.
This showed that the evidence of the second approver regarding the shooting of the ring was untrue, as her engagement had taken place after the crime.
The court further observed that the visuals themselves clearly revealed the victim's identity and that there was no need to capture images of the ring to establish identity.
In paragraph 887, the court examined the alleged motive behind the crime and noted that in the first charge sheet, the prosecution had claimed that accused persons 1 to 6 had kidnapped the victim with the common intention of capturing nude visuals to extort money by threatening to circulate them and there was no mention about Dileep's role in it.
The court also rejected the prosecution's claim that the accused had been planning the assault on Dileep's instructions since 2013, noting that the allegation was not supported by reliable evidence.
It similarly ruled out the claim that Suni attempted to sexually assault the victim in Goa in January 2017, stating that witness statements showed no such misconduct when he served as the driver of the vehicle used by the actress there.
The court also discussed various controversies that followed Dileep's arrest and the evidence relied upon by the prosecution, ultimately finding that the case had not been proved.
Pronouning its verdict on the sensational case on December 8, the court acquitted Dileep and three others.
Later, the court sentenced six accused, including the prime accused Suni, to 20 years' rigorous imprisonment.
The assault on the multilingual actress, after the accused allegedly forced their way into her car and held it under their control for two hours on February 17, 2017, had shocked Kerala.
Pulsar Suni sexually assaulted the actress and video recorded the act with the help of the other convicted persons in the moving car.
