A mob has no religion, the Rajasthan High Court said while commenting on the difficulties in identifying the perpetrators during communal clashes and granting bail to eighteen men accused of being part of a mob that allegedly attacked the participants of a Hindu procession on March 19 in Chittorgarh.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
JAIPUR: The Rajasthan High Court underscored the notion that “a mob has no religion” while addressing the complexities in identifying individuals involved in communal clashes. This observation came as the Court granted bail to eighteen men accused of participating in a mob that allegedly attacked participants of a Hindu procession on March 19 in Chittorgarh.
The Court acknowledged that a clash between two communities had indeed occurred, potentially hurting religious sentiments. However, it emphasized the difficulty in pinpointing the individuals responsible for the “eruption of affray” or those who may have caused injuries.
Justice Farjand Ali highlighted the challenges of distinguishing the actual culprits from innocent bystanders in mob attacks.
“There is no religion of a mob. When a large group of people is alleged to have committed an offence, it becomes a very tedious task to make separation between the innocent and the real culprits. Generally, when some noise is erupted in a crowded area, several persons gather there, some out of curiosity and some out of fear, and some people may presumably come to see what exactly is going on. In such a chaotic situation, sometimes the real culprits make their escape good, whereas the mere onlookers may be booked,”
-the May 20 order stated.
The case stems from a communal clash that reportedly took place on March 19 in Chittorgarh, where stones were allegedly pelted at a Hindu religious procession. The incident resulted in multiple injuries, and one person present at the site later died.
The eighteen accused were arrested on charges of carrying out a premeditated attack using deadly weapons. They were booked under several offences, including murder (Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code) and provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).
Following the rejection of their bail plea by a trial court, the accused approached the High Court for relief. The High Court granted bail to the accused while noting that it was debatable whether the allegations warranted the application of the SC/ST Act. The Court clarified that this aspect would be for the trial court to examine.
“At this stage, it would be unsafe to make any comment regarding the culpability of the appellants,”
-the Court added.
The Court also noted the possibility that the person who died might have succumbed to a heart attack rather than injuries sustained during the clash. The deceased had only a minor injury on his knee, which could not have caused his death.
“There is no opinion of the medical board regarding the cause of death. The viscera of the deceased have been preserved and sent for chemical examination. Probably the cause of death was heart attack or myocardial infarction,”
-the Court observed.
Considering that the accused had been in jail for a considerable duration and the likelihood of a prolonged trial, the Court decided to grant bail.
“No fruitful purpose would be served by keeping them behind the bars. In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is deemed appropriate to grant indulgence of bail to the appellants,”
-the Court concluded.
CASE TITLE:
Babu Mohammed and ors v. State Of Rajasthan and ors.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Muslim Riots
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
