WHENEVER a case of sexual assault hits the headlines in India, without waiting for a court’s verdict the media and civil society emerge as great sympathizers of the victim. In this context, it can be assumed that Indian women are not weak and culprits cannot get away with their crimes.
However, things are not as simple as they might appear. A victim must be supported but such cases should be dealt with extreme caution. During the past few months, a number of rape cases have shocked the Indian nation. Interestingly, the treatment of each case remained very different.
We all are familiar with the Tehelka sex scandal. Tarun Tejpal, editor-in-chief of the magazine, has been accused of molesting his colleague in Goa. He was taken into police custody on Nov. 30. Consequently, Tejpal had to step down from his position. Amid conflicting media reports, it has become difficult to join the dots and come to conclusion. It appears we are yet to get “the whole truth.” Tejpal confessed to having misbehaved with the lady, however, without retracting from his statement ” it was a consensual and healthy flirtatious act and the girl that night was elated too.”
Tejpal reportedly wrote to her offering his apologies. Later, Tejpal claimed that he had written the letter under pressure and he was being “framed.”
Of late, similar charges have been levied against Justice A.K. Ganguly. A law intern has recently accused him of having sexually harassed her last December in a hotel room in New Delhi. Former Supreme Court judge, Ganguly is currently the chairman of the West Bengal Human Rights Commission (WBHRC). He has denied the charges and has refused to step down as the WBHRC chairman.
In this case, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s demand for an action against Ganguly is interesting. Ganguly’s gavel had not been favorable toward her government. He had repeatedly censured Mamata’s government for arresting critics. He had also ordered the West Bengal government to pay Rs50,000 in compensation to a professor who had been arrested for e-mailing a cartoon about her.
Is it possible that the media uproar created by Tejpal’s case provided Ganguly’s critics with a chance to corner him by leveling similar charges against him? Naturally, the former judge’s supporters are of the opinion that he is being “framed.”
It is also being speculated that Khurshid Anwar was being framed. Anwar, executive director of an NGO committed suicide on Dec.18. His suicide note stated that he had been implicated in the rape case. Anwar had been accused of having physically harassed a girl at his residence on Sept.12. A week later, the girl filed a complaint against him with the National Commission for Women, which forwarded it to the police.
Anwar’s colleagues claim that he had been framed. The girl’s statements, recorded by an activist, were being circulated as a part of a “campaign” against Anwar, according to his colleagues. Anwar had filed a defamation cases against three people accusing them of maligning him. He reportedly told one of his colleagues, “Throughout my life, I have fought against such crimes. But now I am being accused of the same crime. I cannot bear it.” This “mental torture” compelled Anwar to commit suicide, according to his associates.
In a spectacular frenzy of sensationalism, the Indian media tend to ignore the other side of the story. Please note, in each of the three cases mentioned above, the judicial system took different paths. Tejpal is in custody and no longer the editor-in-chief of the magazine he had founded. Ganguly has refused to quit office. However, he might be compelled to take this step on the directives of the Indian president. So far, he has not been taken into custody. Anwar was also not arrested but being unable to cope with the pressure, he committed suicide.
Charges filed against the accused in these three cases rest primarily on the recorded statements of the victims. Certainly, the Indian judiciary must be praised for giving so much importance to what the “victims” have stated against the alleged culprits. But then, why are only a few being accorded a “fair” treatment? Why has the Indian legal system turned a blind eye to scores of Muslim women who were brutally raped by rioters in September in Muzaffarnagar? There are reports of numerous girls being held captive for several days and others having been raped in front of their family members. It is not without reason that the Muzaffarnagar violence has been labeled by some as the second “Gujarat carnage.” Numerous women faced similar atrocities during the 2002 Gujarat pogrom.
If the judicial machinery and media can swing into action so swiftly in the case of Tejpal or Ganguly on the basis of complaints by the victims, why can’t the same treatment be meted out to the victims of the Muzaffarnagar riots and the Gujarat violence?
