Monday Musings: Vandalism is an act of crime; punish the guilty

Chief minister Devendra Fadnavis plans to withdraw police cases of vandalism against the accused in the recent Maratha protests.

On September 11, Shiv Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray asked Maharashtra chief minister Devendra Fadnavis to fulfil his promise of withdrawing police cases against members of the Maratha community who repeatedly indulged in vandalism during their recent agitations.

Shiv Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray in a press conference had said that it was “some unscrupulous elements” who had taken advantage of the Maratha protests and indulged in violence in July-August this year. (HT FILE PHOTO FOR REPRESENTATION ONLY)

Thackeray in a press conference said it was “some unscrupulous elements” who had taken advantage of the Maratha protests and indulged in violence in July-August. The Shiv Sena is among the parties who have often been accused of vandalism so, perhaps, Thackeray knows better.

Indeed, it was in July 2018, that Fadnavis had promised a “partial” withdrawal of cases filed against Maratha youths for vandalising public and private property during their protests to demand reservation quotas. By “partial,” Fadnavis meant that criminal cases relating to the assaults on police officials would not be withdrawn. But he too was in agreement that all other cases against the Maratha youth accused of vandalism should be withdrawn.

During that agitation, about 150 vehicles were set on fire in Navi Mumbai, an estimated Rs10 crore worth of property destroyed in Chakan where 60 vehicles, including city buses were vandalised and there was widespread vandalism in Aurangabad , besides other parts of the state, including Pune.

In Pune, protestors barged into some offices and forced the employees to vacate them. The IT firm Persistent Systems filed a police complaint after their entrance gate near the SB road office was broken by the protestors who barged into their office complex to enforce a ‘Maharashtra bandh’.

Indulging in vandalism and destroying public and private properties is an act of crime and should be treated as such. When anyone indulges in vandalism, public safety and security is put at risk, especially when large rampaging mobs go berserk with the confidence of political backing and political support.

Given this reality, it is worth examining legally whether governments can be allowed to withdraw cases of widespread political vandalism. This amounts to partisan politics and blatant interference in matters of law and order and goes against the norms of civil society.

On August 10, a bench headed by then chief justice Dipak Misra termed the situation “grave” when Attorney General KK Venugopal said that violent protests were happening virtually every week, be it the Maratha stir, the Kanwariyas episodes or the ruckus over the film Padmavat.

The court was told that the central government was considering amendment to the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act (PDPP), 1984 when the bench said that it will not wait for the government to undertake the amendment as the situation was grave.

In fact, the Supreme Court had issued guidelines in 2009 which said that organisers of any protests would be held personally accountable for the loss of public and private properties. The organisers were expected to give an undertaking that their protests would be peaceful and the police and the state government were required to videograph the protests “to the maximum extent possible.”

Given the spate of politically motivated vandalism in the country in recent months, it is clear that the “guidelines” have not worked and what is needed is a firm piece of law to act as a deterrent.