|
Bijo Francis,
Advocate, Kerala
This August, a case of
'Sati' - an act of suicide by a wife who throws
herself on to the burning funeral pyre of her husband - was
reported from the state of Madhya Pradesh. The report came from
the village of Tamali Patna, of Panna district, and the incident
was said to have occurred on August 6. The deceased, Mrs Kuttu
Bai, aged 65 years, was reported to have thrown herself on the
funeral pyre of her deceased husband, Mallu Bai. According to the
information received, on news that an act of Sati would
occur, the authorities dispatched two police officers from Saleha
Police Station to the site, but they were attacked by an
approximately 1000-strong mob that had gathered in support of the
act. These people allegedly stoned the police officers and
prevented them from intervening. 15 persons were arrested in
connection with the incident. Subsequently, two versions of the
official response to the incident emerged. The locals opposed to
the act claimed that they informed the police as early as 7am
that Mrs Bai would commit Sati that day, whereas the police
maintained that they received the information only around 9am.
Whatever be the claim,
counterclaim and allegations, this incident points to yet another
breach of duty by state agents and indicates the manner with
which such incidents are dealt with. To understand this, it is
first necessary to appreciate some aspects of the history of Sati
and the legislative response.
Historically, the
conditions for widows of Hindu families have in all respects been
pathetic. Custom had typically demanded that a widow must shave
her head and wear only a white sari or other white clothing after
the death of her husband. She was prohibited from remarrying and
from wearing any gold ornaments. Yet a much more inhuman custom
was that a Hindu widow should simply kill herself in the funeral
pyre of her husband, in an act of Sati.
Many times the act of
Sati was not a case of self-destruction. Widows were thrown into
the funeral pyre of their husbands and sometimes those who were
willing to die in the sacred fire would ask their relatives to
tie their hands and legs together to prevent them from escaping
when the intense heat became unbearable. But a widow unwilling to
be burned to death would be thrown crying for her dear life into
the funeral pyre and if she tried to escape would be pushed or
held in the fire with long sticks or iron poles.
Mr Rajah Ram Mohan
Roy, a great thinker and reformer from Bengal, and one of the
founders of the Indian Press, had to witness these horrendous
crimes being committed on his neighbors and fellow human beings.
He was a profound scholar and humanist, whom Monier Williams
referred to as "perhaps the finest earnest-minded
investigator of the science of comparative religion that the
world has ever produced". Moved by the atrocities committed
against women of his own community, he called for a total ban on
such customary rituals and for a complete prohibition of
polygamy, which was a recognized customary right for the Hindu
males in his community. In 1828 he founded the Brahma Sabha to
propagate his teachings. His efforts had an effect, leading to
the prohibition of Sati by the British colonial government in an
enactment with directives in 1829. In spite of its weaknesses,
and accusations by some nationalist historians that the
legislation was just another element of the 'divide and
rule' policy, this enactment must be recognized as a bold
step towards progressive reforms.
By contrast, it took
the state of post-independence India decades to draft clear
legislation to prevent Sati. It was only in 1987 that clear steps
were taken to end this social menace by way of effective central
legislation. Although the current Act - Act No. 3 of
1988 - is not exhaustive, it does provide for adequate powers
to block the attempt, abetment, commission, and even
glorification of Sati. The essence of the Act is in section 3,
which reads as follows:
Notwithstanding
anything contained in the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860),
whoever attempts to commit Sati and does any act towards
such commission shall be punishable with imprisonment for
a term which may extend to one year or with fine or with
both: Provided
that the Special Court trying an offence under this
section shall, before convicting any person take into
consideration the circumstances leading to the commission
of the offence, the act committed, the state of mind of
the person charged of the offence at the time of the
commission of the act and all other relevant factors.
'Abetment'
is addressed in section 4:
(1) Notwithstanding
anything contained in the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860),
if any person commits Sati, whoever abets the commission
of such Sati, either directly or indirectly, shall be
punishable with death or imprisonment for life and shall
also be liable to fine.(2) If any person attempts to commit
Sati, whoever abets such attempt, either directly or
indirectly, shall be punishable with imprisonment for
life and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation. - For
the purposes of this section, any of the following acts
or the like shall also be deemed to be an abetment,
namely;
(a) Any inducement
to a widow or women to get her burnt or buried alive
along with the body of her deceased husband or with any
other relative irrespective of whether he is in a fit
state of mind or is labouring under a state of
intoxication or stupefaction or other case impeding the
exercise of her free will;
(b) Making a widow
or woman believe that the commission of Sati would result
in some spiritual benefit to her or her deceased husband
or relative or the general well being of the family;
(c) Encouraging a
widow or woman to remain fixed in her resolve to commit
Sati and thus instigating her to commit Sati;
(d) Participating
in the procession in connection with the commission of
Sati or aiding the widow or woman in her decision to
commit Sati by taking her along with the body of her
deceased husband or relative to the cremation or burial
ground;
(e) Being present
at the place where Sati is committed as an active
participant to such commission or to any ceremony
connected with it;
(f) Preventing or
obstructing the widow or woman from saving herself from
being burnt or buried alive;
(g) Obstructing or
interfering with the police in the discharge of its
duties of taking any steps to prevent the commission of
Sati.
'Glorification of
Sati' is defined in section 2:
(1) In this Act,
unless the context otherwise requires, (b)
"Glorification", in relation to Sati, whether
such Sati was committed before or after the commencement
of this Act, includes, among other things,
(i) The observance
of any ceremony or the taking out of a procession in
connection with the commission of Sati; or
(ii) The
supporting, justifying or propagating of the practice of
Sati in any manner; or
(iii) The arranging
of any function to eulogise the person who has committed
Sati; or
(iv) The creation
of a trust, or the collection of funds, or the
construction of a temple or other structure or the
carrying on of any form of worship or the performance of
any ceremony thereat, with a view to perpetuate the
honour of, or to preserve the memory of, a person who has
committed Sati;
Punishment for
offences under the Act is captured in section 5:
Whoever does any act
for the glorification of Sati shall be punishable with
imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one
year but which may extend to seven years and with a fine
which shall not be less than five thousand rupees but
which may extend to thirty thousand rupees.
The Act further
enumerates certain safeguards to be taken by the government
machinery and by the administration, casting a duty upon the
state to prevent any act of Sati from occurring, as follows:
Section 6. Power to
prohibit certain acts. (1) Where the Collector or the
District Magistrate is of the opinion that Sati or any
abetment thereof is being, or is about to be committed,
he may, by order, prohibit the doing of any act towards
the commission of Sati by any person in any area or areas
specified in the order.
(2) The Collector
or the District Magistrate may also, by order, prohibit
the glorification in any manner of Sati by any person in
any area or areas specified in the order.
(3) Whoever
contravenes any order made under sub-section (1) or
sub-section (2) shall, if such contravention is not
punishable under any other provision of this Act, be
punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not
be less than one year but which may extend to seven years
and with a fine which shall not be less than five
thousand rupees but which may extend to thirty thousand
rupees.
Section 7. Power to
remove certain temples or other structures.
(1) The State
Government may, if it is satisfied that in any temple or
other structure which has been in existence for not less
than twenty years, any form of worship or the performance
of any ceremony is carried on with a view to perpetuate
the honour of, or to preserve the memory of, any person
in respect of whom Sati has been committed, by order,
direct the removal of such temple or other structure.
(2) The Collector
or the District Magistrate may, if he is satisfied that
in any temple or other structure, other than that
referred to in sub-section (1), any form of worship or
the performance of any ceremony is carried on with a view
to perpetuate the honour of, or to preserve the memory
of, any person in respect of whom Sati has been
committed, by order, direct the removal of such temple or
other structure.
(3) Where any order
under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) is not complied
with, the State Government or the Collector or the
District Magistrate as the case may, be, shall cause the
temple or other structure to be removed through a police
officer not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector at the cost
of the defaulter.
Section 8. Power to
seize certain properties.
(1) Where the
Collector or the District Magistrate has reason to
believe that any funds or property have been collected or
acquired for the purpose of glorification of the
commission of any Sati or which may be found under
circumstances which create suspicion of the commission of
any offence under this Act, he may seize such funds or
property.
(2) Every Collector
or District Magistrate acting under sub-section (1) shall
report the seizure to the Special Court, if any,
constituted to try any offence in relation to which such
funds or property were collected or acquired and shall
await the order of such Special Court as to the disposal
of the same.
Certain persons are
also cast with the responsibility to report to the authorities
regarding the crime and its preparations. The provisions are as
follows:
Section 17. Obligation
of certain persons to report about the commission of an
offence under this Act. (1) All officers of Government are
hereby required and empowered to assist the police in the
execution of the provisions of this Act or any rule or
order made there under.
(2) All village
officers and such other officers as may be specified by
the Collector or the District Magistrate in relation to
any area and the inhabitants of such area shall, if they
have reason to believe or have the knowledge that Sati is
about to be, or has been, committed in the area shall
forthwith report such fact to the nearest police station.
(3) Whoever
contravenes the provisions of subsection (1) or
sub-section (2) shall be punishable with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to two
years and shall also be liable to fine.
Over and above all
this, in the case of Sati, the burden of proof is the reverse of
the norm, i.e., it is upon the accused to prove that the act of
Sati was not committed. The provision in section 16 is as
follows:
Where any person is
prosecuted of an offence under Section 4, the burden of
proving that he had not committed the offence under the
said section shall be on him.
Moreover, in the
Commission of Sati (Prevention) Rules, 1988, provision is made
that adequate measures be taken to prevent the crime. In rule 4,
the authorities are vested with powers for passing prohibitory
orders as follows:
(1) Every prohibitory
order under Sec. 6 shall be made by beat of drum or other
customary mode, in the concerned village, or in case of
town or city, in the locality in which the act prohibited
is likely to occur or has taken place.
(2) The prohibitory order
shall be displayed at some conspicuous place in the area
or areas to which such acts relate and a copy thereof
shall also be displayed in the office of the officer
issuing the prohibitory order and such display shall be
taken as a sufficient notice to all persons concerned in
the area or areas to which such order relates.
Inevitably, offences
occur irrespective of whether or not prohibitory legislation is
in place to deal with it; this is a fact of human nature.
However, offences can be contained and their recurrence limited
through effective implementation of enactments and through a
conscious attempt at social change. Implementation does not
merely mean punishment of the culprit but effective prevention of
crime as well.
This is apparently
what the legislature had in mind when drafting the law on
prevention of Sati, as it made adequate provision to stop
commission of the offence before it occurs. Unfortunately, the
law has not seen much use since its promulgation. The provisions
intended to prevent the commission of Sati have not been put into
practice, nor have later lawmakers developed them further. The
framers of the enactment would presumably never have thought that
their successors would sleep through their duty and neglect the
authority available to them to bring in adequate revisions to
address the changing conditions since 1988.
What are some of the
weaknesses in getting this legislation brought into practice and
both the public and legislature's consciousness? Mere
proclamations, sound and fury, will not prevent crime. Education
and awareness - building must begin at the grassroots level.
NGOs have a major role to play here. The people should be
adequately enlightened to appreciate the utter hollowness of such
ritual practices and brought to question such practices within
their belief system.
Another problem lies
in the practical administration of the law. The officer empowered
to take action on receiving a report regarding preparation for
commission of Sati or glorification of such an act is also an
executive officer of the district burdened with other
administrative responsibilities. Many of these officials are
appointed via nepotistic and corrupt channels, and are little
bothered about the welfare of the community and, needless to say,
the impact of such horrendous crimes on the society.
Then comes the
inattentiveness of the police. In the case cited above there are
already different versions of how and why the police failed to
respond to the complaint. The police have held that they were not
informed in time to prevent the crime, but can they be believed?
The police in this country have not earned the trust of the
people, and their claims invariably lack credibility. Under any
circumstances, their un-preparedness to meet such an
emergency - manifest in the number of officers dispatched to
the site to interfere in a so-called religious ceremony - is
also condemnable.
The death of Mrs Bai was just another act of Sati reported in
the national media this year. What has the government done so
far? Where was the district machinery when these acts were
committed? Where were those persons cast with the duty to prevent
such crimes? An act of Sati is likely to happen again in the near
future. In a country where racial violence the likes of was seen
in Gujarat recently can occur and be tacitly approved by the
persons of authority, it is not difficult to compel a woman to
commit Sati and get away with it. What else can be expected when
the politicians spend their time consulting hardcore
'sadhus' (hermits clad in saffron) on each and every
step to be taken regarding issues of national importance? These
are the same 'sadhus' who openly declare in public that
Hindustan is for Hindus and that they will not pay heed to any
directives of the courts, even those of the Apex Court. Time and
again the government has demonstrated an inability - or
unwillingness - to understand that by being guided by
religious sentiment and the words of these so-called holy men,
this country is being lead into deeper havoc. As a result, under
the independent government of India our people may suffer from a
far greater level of religious intolerance and communalism than
what our forebears faced under the British regime.
Posted on 2002-11-22
|
