CHAPTER - 1

INTRODUCTION

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed
with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of
brotherhood. Mob lynching means by passing the legitimate means by a group of
people in order to impose what they believe is justice. There is a high rise in mob
lynching in India in a span of time. Many innocent have been brutally tortured and
some even lost their lives for no crime at all. There are so many reasons for mob
lynching such as extremism, casteism,robbery, extortion, rape, Romeo square anti-
nationalist, witch hunting, class conflict and political reasons. Mob linching violences
also raises a question mark on rule of law as a bunch of people themselves become
the law, judge and executioner itself. In mob lynching involvement of mob is certain,
the process and kind of violence are also some how the same though the reasons,
basis and circumstances can be different.These crimes take place when people get
incited by hatred and anger and get ready to take law into their own hands. This
violence is named as hate crimes based on the hate of people towards particular
community, religion, region, caste or sex. It is very crucial to think that why the
people suddenly consider a person harmful for the whole society and take such a
drastic decision of killing him or her.In India, mob lynching has been condemned as a
violation of the Sanatan Dharma's traditions and, above all, of humanity. Mob
Lynching challenges the very foundations of the law, which is a sine qua non for
civilization.
Mob lynching has not been mentioned under the Indian Legal System thereof no
specific law or punishment is available for lynching. Lynching means killing someone
by mob action without legal approval. The word 'lynch' or 'lynch law' has been
derived by two Americans named Charles Lynch and William Lynch during the
American Revolution particularly to deal with Negroes. The motive and meaning of
this derivation was punishment without trial (Quinion, 2008). The Inferiorisation
Process was used in Lynch law which means to target the specific group or
community of the society as blacks were the objective in America. William Oliver
(1989) portrayed the "Inferiorisation Process" as physical violence in a systematic
form in all the political, legal, educational, economic, religious, military, and mass
media arena to get all institutions under the control of Whites".

SCOPE AND OBJECT OF STUDY

Mob lynching is assaulting somebody, physically attacking an individual prompting
death, by agathering of individuals loosely associated with one another, based on
some bogus information,for the most part based on unconfirmed bits of gossip like
cow slaughter, beef eating, childlifting, burglary, enticing women, and so forth. This is
regularly done on deceptions and itordinarily prompts wilderness, hurt done more
often than not to unsuspecting people and innocent. Lynching is not a new thing in
India. They are being recorded fromshortly after independence. But there has been a
sudden rise in the cases of lynching since a fewyears.The constant increase in the
instances of mob lynching seems to weaken the pillars of indian constitution. The
expression 'we the people' enshrined in the preamble of indian constitution is
questioned as lynching by the mob connotes the absence of we feeling among the
people. Similarly, the expression of 'sovereignty' and 'secularism' attracts the highest
level of criticism. The expression "fraternity' is attacked whenever the issue of mob
lynching comes into light. Fraternity refers to brotherhood, and it cannot stand still
when mob lynching takes place. Thus, news pertinent to this infamous issue has
become too ordinary to get confound.

a) To analyse increasing rate mob lynching phenomenon in India.

b) To examine the factors that constitute the reason for this horrendous act of
mobocracy.
c) To study the incidents of mob lynching.
d) To study what is the approach of judiciary with regard to the concept of mob
lynching.

RESEARCH PROBLEM
a)Whether mob lynching is an end to justice?Is it the failure of Indian legal
system?
 b)Does the Right to life guaranteed under article 21 of the constitution is
threatened by the expression mob Lynching?
c)Whether the legislature or judiciary provide effective laws to put an end to
the savage concept of mob Lynching?Is the law enforcement agencies are
effectively ensuring that the people doesn't resort to vigilantism and take law
into their hands?
d)Whether the concept of rule of law is desecrated by the act of mob
lynching?With reference to Tahseen S. Poonawala case.

HYPOTHESIS

a) Mob lynching is gaining ground in a burgeoning democracy like india,which is

home to diverse culture and traditions.
b) Internal tensions between different communities in India are the main cause of
mob lynchings.

REVIEW OF THE EXSISTING LITERATURE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The study currently is prepared basically through analytical method, studying the
existing literature. Secondary sources including articles and books of both Indian and
foreign authors and online data bases have been referred.
 CHAPTER -2
History of mob Lynching

The word lynch was derived in the united states in the mid-18 century during
the american revolution. It was phrased as "lynch law" means punishment without
trial. As per historians, the word was first used by planter charles lynch and william
lynch to narrate extra-judicial authority used by private individuals like him. Over time
it came to be applied to extra-judicial killings by crowds, it was most common in
african-americans in the late 19 century during that 341 time.lynching was preferably
used against black people, and several cases were even reported in the us before
the american civil war. In some instances, whites were also lynched for taking a
stand for slavery against black people. Vigilante justice was practiced in many
countries under conditions where informally organised groups tried to supplement
legal justice. For instance, the fehmic courts of germany had punishments which
involved lynching

There were two significant plots of lynching that existed in the community and the
past.
1. The classic lynching: the member of an established society punishes a newcomer
or an outsider It can be related to one act of wrongdoing
2. The communal lynching: members of society punish the insider. It occurs after a
few offences committed by the same individual over a period of time

The first case of lynching was witnessed in st. Louis in 1835, mcintosh black man
killed a sheriff while he was taken to jail. He was chained to a tree and pushed to
death in front of 1000 people. Lynching, which was first started in america became a
focal point of many other countries as well. Many countries the cases of lynching
generally occurred due to racism mob lynching is not new in india although the word
is of foreign origin.
 LYNCHING IN INDIA

India is a country known to be full of different cultures, religions, viewpoints and a

lot more things, but it is also known for its crime rates, one of which is known is the
mob lynching of the suspicioned.Till now there have been no cases of foresure
wrongdoers but they were just supposed to be one, this seems very irresponsible of
the government on its part, as they have not been able to come through with any
amendment striking this very crime. This appears to have been conceived by the
individuals for their wrath is over any law. This is appearing to be typical for
individuals to argue this wrongdoing generally to be collective and as India is a
common nation its viewpoints to side any one religion can't be conceivable. Yet,this
is no real way to offer equity to the blameless or regardless of whether they
perpetrated a wrongdoing they don't have the right beyond words such an awful
episode. They were no warriors executed in war, regular citizens butchered by
dangerous dread gatherings, or radicals squashed by state power.They were 'we',
the individuals of the world's biggest majority rules system, which were pursued,
pounded the life out of and tormented by vindictive, murderous groups. Lynching is
not death of one person or family, but the citizens of the very country are feared to
be in their hometown. It is not a safe country with people filled with rage so high that
they don’t spare them any doubt. Not even one case in India has been brought
justice to or gotten to any conclusion to bring this horrendous activity to an end. All
this is asked for the bodies that have been befouled, they pass on in outrageous
dread and torment, arguing guiltlessness and asking for benevolence. Just for a
word the Indian Penal Code (IPC) doesn't perceive: 'lynching'.
For the first time indian legal history in the national campaign against mob
lynching (ncaml's) draft for "protection from lynching act, 2017 defined term
"lynching", "mob", and "victims of moblynching" It still exists in india due to set up of
its historical background and reasons why it grew are as follow:

1. Structure of society which is still recognised in our society on the basis of religions
and castes. Community identity is one of the drivers that leads to violence of
lynching
2. The weakness of the government and judicial system to challenge the mob.
India is observing a high rise in cases of mob lynching as well. Taking the law into
hands could be dangerous. There is no particular reason for the existence of mob
lynching. However, event leads to heinous crime when a victim has committed a
particular crime that has hurt the moral sentiments. Mostly in india, victims of
lynching are minorities dalits or muslims, lynching against cow smuggling
allegations, and lynching related to child-lynching suspicion. this offence is a threat
to our nation and modern society because the mob takes into hand the role of the
state. If it is allowed, it will lead to hobbes' state of nature which claims man to be
nasty and society remains in a state of non-peace." few incidents that happened in
the history of india portrayed the same.

Legacy of partition: the year of partition 1947 witnessed lynching and collective
violence of which women and victims became the worst victims. Nisidhajari in
"midnight furies" (houghton mifflin harcourt) his fast-paced new narrative of partition
and its aftermath, writes, "gangs of killers set whole villages aflame, hacking to death
men and children and the aged while carrying off young women to be raped. Some
british soldiers and journalists who had witnessed the nazi death camps claimed
partition's brutalities were worse. pregnant women had their breasts cut off and
babies hacked out of their bellies, infants were found roasted on spits"

From the above discussion, it has been realised that mob lynching is a part of history
not in india,but the presence of its root is felt all over the world. The problem is not
limited to any particular nation various reports of the united nations have proved
lynching cases from sudan, nigeria, haiti,and other countries. When the problem is
increasing and is not under control, the role played by law has to be analysed. This
report further discusses the legal history of subject mob lynching India does not
explicitly have laws dealing with mob lynching. The indian penal code does not
explicitly mention the word "lynching". However, the code of criminal procedure,
1973 talks about persons or a mob involved in the same offence in the same
activities that can be tried together Nevertheless, the law fails to grant justice to the
victims. We can see that reports of lynching are increasing in the past few years, but
we do not have any separate data for the cases. In 2018 national crime record
bureau (ncrb) released the report "crime in india" but it also failed to include new
categories like mob lynching
In 2018 supreme court described lynching as a "horrendous act of mobocracy". In
case "tahseen s. Poonawalla v. Union of india and others issued guidelines for the
police administration of the entire country as an interim order. Further supreme court
issued guidelines out of which main steps are as follow
1. It was ordered to designate an officer of sp rank as nodal officer to prevent mob
violence;
2. Broadcasting of messages that involvement into lynching shall invite severe
consequences by the centre, state and local authorities;
3. Spreading of fake news and messages shall lead to the filing of fir against culprit.
4. Failure on the part of police and district administration on complying with se's
guidelines will amount to negligence;
5 States to make compensation schemes for victims;
6 Lynching cases should be tried out by fast track courts in each district and to be
concluded in 6 months.

CHAPTER -3

Reasons for mob Lynching and causes of increasing mob lynching

Recently increased Mob Lynching in India shows a strange barbarous behavior of

human. Mob Lynching incorporates the injury or murder of a person who is a criminal
or accused of a crime against the community in the eyes of the Mob involved in the
lynching.

Caste and Religious motivated:

Violence on the name of caste and religion is deep-rooted in India. Presently

increasing mob lynching cases are mostly result of intolerance and hatred towards
other religion and caste on the name of professing, practice, traditions, and caw. In
2002 five Dalits from Haryana were lynched on the rumour of cow slaughter and
recent Muzzafarnagar and Kokrajhar riots demonstrate the caste and religion as a
factor of mob lynching (Bakshi & Nagarajan, 2017).
Economic and Political motivated:

Economy and Politics always play a great role in mob lynching. In villages, mob
lynching is the easiest way to grab land and property, Maharashtra's Kherlanji
Massacre case of 2006 was the first reported case on lynching Around 50 villagers
beat four members of the family and parading naked the wife and their daughter
before they murdered them due to a land dispute (First Post, 2016). A certain kind of
political ideology which is based on hindutva is playing a huge role in such incidents.
In the case of Mob lynching it is easy to influence the crowd on the name of religion,
culture, and traditions. On 24 January 2009, a radical outfit attacked a group of
young women and men in a pub in Mangalore, claiming that the women were
violating traditional Indian values.

It is easy to collect the mob by making religion, caste, sex, etc as a political agenda.
In India, some of the political parties and groups are historically based on religion
and caste which spread hatred in society to play their political card during election
resulted in mob attacks. It is the cheap and best way to win the election in India as
most of the population of India is a religious, superstitious and emotional fool. Beef
ban, Romeo squire, Ghar Vapsi and Love jihad, etc are all politically motivated
notions to polarize the society and take advantage as political gain.

Mob Justice:

Due to unawareness of legal provisions and consequences of breaching the law,

less strictness from police, and slow process of legal mechanism, people of India
endeavor to be judge and to do justice themselves by defining their own rules and
regulations. In February 2016 the JNUSU President Kanhaiya Kumar, arrested on
sedition charges, was beaten up by lawyers while he was being produced at Patiala
House Court. In May 2017, an e-rickshaw driver was lynched by a mob of students
from Delhi University. The incident occurred after the driver had stopped two drunken
students from urinating in public which later they had returned with a group of
students to lynch the driver (First Post, 2017). In June 2017, the two youths were
beaten to death by a mob of at least 250 people who suspected them to be child
lifter in Guwahati (Tehelka, 2018). In 2017 more than 27 persons have been killed
just on the suspecting to be a child lifter. Mob justice sometimes gets back support
from political parties and groups.

Witch hunting:

Witch hunting is the historical problem in India which is wholly based on mob
lynching "Witch-hunting" includes branding a woman as a witch, mostly after an Ojha
confirms that a woman is a witch, the process of prosecution and execution of that
woman, often involving mass hysteria and lynching (The Prevention of Witch hunting
Bill, 2016). Witch hunting literally means molesting and killing a woman believed to
have evil magic power. In witch hunting, the involvement of the mob in torturing and
killing the victim is the prima facie. The Reasons for witch hunting are noticed as
grabbing land, settle scores, family rivalry, property, patriarchy, superstition,
suppression, subordination, sexual advances, and caste factors.

The main reason for increasing mob lynching is the lack of fear and unawareness
about the consequences as there is no legal provision for the offense of lynching.
The people in the group who commit the offense, think that they can get away with
the offense.The ineffective investigation and negligence by police officials and the
ineffective justice system are the reasons for this fearlessness in the society that
further fuels the process of increase of the offense.Indirect support from the
government is another reason. Some incidents of mob lynching are because of cow
vigilantism. Several political leaders publicly supported the mob that killed a person
over the suspicion of eating beef or selling beef. In the past few years in India these
criminal incidents are taking place frequently, but no serious action is adopted to
prevent such offenses.The most common reason is technology. In recent years, an
increase in online rumors and misinformation have resulted in numerous people
falling victim to lynching by the mob in the society. The role of social media has
played an increasing crime has thrown the spotlight multitude impact in the country.
The internet companies and the role of social media users are still to come up with
effective measures and policy to control the spread of misinformation which include
fake news and unfortunate impact.
 CHAPTER -4

INCIDENTS OF MOB LYNCHING IN INDIA

1. Kheerlanji Massacre 2006.

The first recorded instance of lynching officially noted is that one of Kherlanji
massacre in 2006. On September 29, 2016, a horde of 50 residents raged into
Bhaiyyalal Bhotmange's home, and lynched four individuals from his family over a
debate over family dispute. Bhotmange's better half Surekha and their little girl
Priyanka were strutted in the town and explicitly mishandled before severely killing
them. The assault was after these ladies recorded a police protest against 15 towns
who whipped a family member. Eight out of 11 denounced were indicted this
January. There were endeavours to standardize the lynching later saying it was a
casteist outrage against Dalits by the politically predominant Kumbi rank. It was
identified by the high courts of Bombay and Nagpur bench that this had been a case
of four Dalits of one family. This is in striking complexity to their unconcealed
fulfilment over the death penalty granted by the extraordinarily delegated Fast Track
preliminary Court in 2008 to six of the eight blamed, who were accused of
mercilessly clearing out everything except one of a Dalit family. The High Court, on
offer, drove capital punishment in light of the fact that it was "not the rarest of the
uncommon cases," justifying capital punishment. The intrigue court changed the
sentence on these six people and the two others, who were given life terms by the
lower court, to a 25-year detainment.

2. Dadri mob lynching 2015.

This case is one of the first and most horrendous cases of cow- vigilantism against
an innocent Muslim man, Mohammad Akhlaq. The sad part being that 18 men who
committed the felony are bailed. This man was dragged out of his house in village
bishara, dadri .After a nearby Hindu temple declared that a cow, thought about
consecrated by numerous Hindus, had been butchered. The man was pounded the
life out of and his child was seriously injured. There were life-size posters featuring
ved nagar and his organisation of Gau Raksha Hindu Dal with a warning that said
“we will slaughter anyone who slaughters a cow”7 According to the FIR,
mohammad’s neighbour, prem singh has seen him along with his brother, cutting a
calf with other members of the family, whereas according to his brother Jan, Singh
was not in town that day. Either the lynching happened merely due to the doubt of a
Muslim having fed on the cow that was of the holy temple of the Hindu, or just hatred
of the opposite religion. The fear of the victim’s family was their safety after the
accused had been released from the jail; it would be nothing but a fearful life ahead
of them. Hence, goes the right to life in vain. The victim’s family will be in fear of
losing their lives. Jan has been provided with an armed gunman for 24/7 safety of
himself and his family, but one gunman can do no good to a horde of 100s. It is also
believable that the yogi government, which is quiet hindu-nationalist, might take
away his security from him. Later, it was found by the physical examination that the
meat was of mutton, in another examination it was said to be “of cow or its progeny”.
Even after a year later there was no evidence found on, the cow that had been
slaughtered was the meat that was eaten by Mohammad’s family. Mohammad’s
mother, wife, children and brothers were compensated with 4,500,000 rupees, along
with three apartments at reasonable rate but no one dares to live there, for these are
located on a remote highway, outskirts of the city. This is the case of both the
reasons, cow vigilantism and silence of the political parties, being a pro-hindu state
government does not give immunity to devastate the citizens of any other religion, if
the cow eating is banned then there should be some relief or warning to someone
who does not abide by the law, but there is no right to anyone to annihilate any
man’s life, for any reason whatsoever.

3. Nowhatta lynching 2017

This is another embarrassing and obnoxious lynch horde murder which defaced an
on-duty officer Muhammad Ayub Pandith, a secret officer of the Indian police security
in Jammu and Kashmir. He was guarding his usual place at night, which was a
sacred occasion for the Muslims on the night of the slaughtering. On 22nd June
2017 he was assassinated in front of the mosque and was not given any chance to
be heard. He was mistaken to be an offender as his name suggested “Pandith
“Hindu name meaning there by he was a “non-Muslim” standing outside a mosque.
Yes,it is questionable but not enough to have been punished with the horrific
death. He was unknown to many and that’s what brought in more ambiguity and
oneness in doing the wrong. He could not show his id card for he was a secret
agent, and this in our country was mistook to be a RAW agent and Indian IB, even
the usual visitors of the mosque did not speak up although they were familiar with
the officer. The crowd yelled slogans of Pakistan terrorist group Al- Qaida and
jihadist Zakir Musa. It was accounted for that the slogan yelling was recorded by
Pandith. He also resorted to using his gun, injuring three of the hecklers but there
was nothing stopping the men from coming at him. He was assaulted, stripped bare
and pelted with stones, batons, iron rods and sharp weapons, his body was
recouped in a ravaged state. It was expressed by an onlooker that a portion of the
aggressors were seen gnawing the arms and legs of Ayub’sfallen bare body “like
dogs”. Some of the guilty men were found and charged with section 302 i.e. murder.
After, such a sickening death any officer, or non-Muslim would have been scared the
bejesus out of him and would fear coming out of his local area or even house, such
is an expected behaviour, for the constitution does not save its people from such a
ghastly crime then the atleast the people will worry for themselves. This massacre
lead to an anti – terrorism hunts down. There is a little ambiguity here that only after
this heinous crime in which one official was killed the search or hunt down began not
before that. Does that imply that the state was happy with terrorists as residents,
even when the same terrorist was in a grenade attack and not only that, why was he
not shot down or held in custody then, such mistakes cost a human life like that of
the police officer.

4 Jharkhand lynching 2019

A man was assaulted by a lynch horde and was done so just because he was in
doubt of having stolen a bicycle TabrezAnsari is a 24-year -old. The man had come
to visit another town but was rather stuck at dhatkidih, where without any question or
talk he was beaten brutally as he was of an outside town and that was their only
basis for having stolen the vehicle. While the crowd was beating him, a video was
made by an unidentified individual in the horde. He had to state strict mottos, for
example, ‘jai shri ram’ and ‘jai hanuman’, (‘hail lord ram’ and ‘triumph to lord ram’.)
Before, assaults and lynching’s powered by gossipy titbits on WhatsApp happened in
India, where the quick proliferations of phony news have prompted victims’ results.
Tabrez was later found to be dead. By the family of the deceased it was asked that
they punished the culprit under article 302 i.e. punishment for homicide of the Indian
penal code.12 A special team was relegated to explore the case further, but did not
seem to do the deserved justice for the man, for all of the slayers have not been
caught. This event is showing the gruesome way the Hindu mythology was used to
torture a man of a totally different religion; this might be pleasurable for the one’s
slaughterers but not something which at any cost the Hindu religion would preach.
The lynching brought out open anger for using the Hindu lord slogans as an assault
slogan and other different riffs. Modi remarked that he was shocked to catch such a
disturbing event in his country and it would be requiring “the strictest conceivable
discipline to the accused” Our country is known for its diversity, its secularism, but
the misuse of it is the worst part of such a country, people are at each other’s neck
for any petty comment on their religion or caste or any difference whatsoever. Such
makes India a uniquely discriminative nation. The citizens of this nation are not afraid
of laws, however strict and binding they might be, people will do anything to favour
and support only their thinking or religious beliefs. This very case a police officer was
treated brutally and still there seem to be no specific law for detaining such activity
from happening, even now lynching’s are happening and however hard the security
forces try, the number of the people against the forces is usually way more and its
extremely difficult to control such a large group of angry people. Strict measures
should be drawn and also be well executed so that before committing such a crime
people worry of the consequences.

5 Palghar lynching 2020

Secularity is an issue for the Indians. They don’t seem to be humane or
understanding to the opposite or say another religion, but would fight hand and limbs
just for a doubt. This case came as more of a shock because lynching is easy when
people are freely moving the country and have no police officials, stopping them from
moving about, but this case happened in April 2020, when the world is hit by a
pandemic and the country is under exacting lockdown,meaning thereby people are
not permitted to come out of their homes, which in this was not followed because
lynching cannot be done sitting peacefully at home.This lynching occurred after the 2
men namely,Kalpavruksha Giri and Sushilgiri Maharaj were allegedly suspected to
be child-kidnappers and organ harvesters. The two saints were returning from a
funeral and in order to not be obstructed in their travel the men along with their driver
took a different route which went through the district of palghar to enter Gujarat
instead of using the Mumbai - Gujarat highway. Even after having taken these
measures for their smooth journey they were stopped by a patrol. While they were
talking to the guard a vigilante group of Christian commissionaires and Muslims
hounded them and resorted to assault immediately.Later the police were informed
and had taken the two men in their vehicles, even this did no good as they were
pulled out of the police vehicle and lynched. The police have arrested 101 people
and 9 minors so far.13 The politicians were just saying one thing that this is “not
communal” which does not seem to be the case at all.14 The incident is very sad
and indefensible, and the miserable fact is that propagandists cannot stop
themselves from giving this one a communal turn too. For a country in such a social
seclusion and lockdown of such a high scale to work, strict policing should be
exceptionally productive, also gossip mongering should be stopped from the
beginning and those liable for spreading canards should be managed carefully.
Effective policing is the only way plausible for controlling such misdemeanour at
least until there is a law passed or put a ban to.

6. Dimapur lynching 2015.

A detainee was legitimately charged of a wrongdoing he had not committed, yet the
most exceedingly terrible part is that there were around 7000-8000 individuals who
hauled this man out of the jail and was beaten to death just because he was under
suspicion of having committed a rape.This horde gave it the name of “vigilante
justice”. The man was thought to be an illegal immigrant from Bangladesh into
Nagaland. He was alleged having sexually assaulted a 20-year old girl. The alleged
and his accomplice were then arrested and put in the Dimapur central jail. They were
charged under the sections 476, 344 and 363 of the Indian penal code.15 All of
allegations if true the lynching might have been justice to not only the girl that was
raped, but also other who thought of committing a crime like rape, but as it is known
that the man was lynched by around 7000 people and was not declared guilty yet.
Thus, it proves the lack of a faster justice system and rather that how the man could
be taken out of a prison cell and beaten to death. Out of the thousands only 58
criminals were executed and 32 were served with legal notices.The Indian
constitution very well mentions two fundamental rights, the right to life in article 21
and right against exploitation article 23 and 24. Fundamental rights of the accused
have been abused which is a serious concern for every nation and should have had
some strict actions by now, but nothing seemed to have done as we had more of
these horrific cases, and each more terrifying than the other.

7.. Akku Yadav case,2006

This case is quite old but it was an unusual kind of lynching. A man named Akku
Yadav of New Delhi was a goon, thief, rapist, an accused murderer16 basically a
full-fledged criminal.The man targeted only the members of the “untouchable” caste,
as he knew that if they ever complained they would not be heard in any seriousness
and rather be mocked because the officers were bribed. Akku always thought of
himself to be an untouchable until the day a horde of 200 women lynched him to his
senses; all these women were his rape victims. A girl, Narayanewas rapedmany
times by this man and went to the commissioner and filed a complaint. Akku was
then arrested and his house was destroyed, but then later in a court appearance it
was heard that he might get bailed, which infuriated the women and they decided to
take the matters into their own hands. Womenused their daily applicable weapons,
vegetable knives, chilli powder and stones; these were around 200 women who
crowded the courthouse.The man never had any shame in him, even when he
walked past them in the courthouse, he had the audacity of name calling a woman, a
prostitute and frightening her to rape her again. This infuriated the women and they
started attacking him with the weapons they had in hand, the police ran seeing such
angry women. The man was under attack for over 10 mins in which he was stabbed
many times and a woman cut off his penis. After this ghastly attack akku was found
dead, his body was a gory mess and could not be recognised. This might be the only
case where all the murders were held in custody. The women had taken full
responsibility of the murder,18 but they were sure of one thing that they had not
planned such a death for the man but it was instinct that followed when he teasing
the girl. All of the womenwere later released due to the lack of evidence. This case
might not have gotten peace to the country but atleast to the female power if
enraged is visible to people who think women are powerless. This is an unusual
case but not legally right, as that man even though this was not a suspect but the
very criminal was slaughtered and not innocent. This case is different because had
all these rape cases been reported, in order to provide justice to all of them it would
have taken years and some might have suicided instead of facing the humiliation.
Such cases might need lynching but this is just a way of taking away a person’s right
to life which is fundamental right and cannot be taken away whatsoever.

CHAPTER -4

IMPACT OF MOB LYNCHING ON SOCIETY

India is becoming a powerful country at a global level but seemed to be plagued with
horde taking the laws into their own hand there is no stopping them from doing
it.Lynching around the world has come to a near end but India, a country so wide
and diverse, the crime still continues and there seem to be no end around. The right
to life, article 2 of the human rights act which means to safeguard the human life,
which is so wildly annihilated at no cost in India, which also comes under the purview
of the equality and human rights commission. There has been no compensation from
the central government, at least there could have been some restrictions drawn up to
put an end to this massacre. Some of the state government even compensated for
the cases they thought to be plausible, but that is no justice to the states and families
who couldn’t provide that provision either. The national crime record bureau could
not define the mob lynching as a definite crime because of the lack of evidence and
data, more than half the cases have not been filed but is known to people. The crime
is heinous and is a total disaster for the protection of human life, which is the object
of electing a government of our own choice in order to not be faced with such a
felony and rather be saved and protected. The most suffered is the victim, people
destroy the victim’s houses, and their families are torn apart. If in case the bread
earner of the family is dead then what will the mother and children do with their lives,
they will be left uneducated illiterate for the rest of their life. There is no law to save
the family of the lynched; at least the part that cannot be undone should not be the
reason for the suffering of the family. India has many crimes and very less need
compensation from the government this is one such case and can be done only
when the government affirms mob lynching a crime. Everyday people are losing their
lives because of such hate crimes and they often have no idea of being in such a
deplorable situation of life and death. As the news spreads faster on social media,
people protest against such hate crimes on social media in order to grab attention to
them and be the voice of the country as a whole without any physical violence. Such
is the case for lynching too, #lynchistan to the NOT IN MY NAME protest on twitter
had begun, but the issue was that there were no laws protecting the protestors,
which was a shock to people as lynching is clearly murder. It is quite shameful to see
that the Indian Penal Code has no mention ofsuch a horrendous crime and has the
mention of crimes which are all committed in one act i.e. lynching. The crimes that
are involved in lynching are namely, culpable homicide(section 299 of Indian Penal
Code ).
This act of people taking the law into their own hands due to a lack of
understanding of the justice system poses a severe danger to the Rule of Law and
Natural Justice concepts.Such activities have also posed a major threat to the
country's minority populations. and adequate measures must be made to prevent
and deter such crimes.Furthermore, vigilantes with some political affiliations to
right-wing groups have perpetrated acts of violence, believing themselves to be
politically proper while doing so.Across the country, mob violence has frequently
resulted in the promotion of majoritarianism by propagating the majority's values
while limiting minorities' basic rights.People taking justice into their own hands in a
country like India is unacceptable, because inhabitants of the country have been
awarded many fundamental rights, and such lynching cases are an affront to their
right to life, right to a fair trial, and so on.India is a secular country, thus it's critical to
ensure that minorities' rights are maintained and that the majority does not oppress
them.

CHAPTER -5
LAW AND ORDER ON MOB LYNCHING AND FAILURE OF THEIR
IMPLEMENTATION

Legislations:
Mob Lynching is a heinous crime and gross violence of human rights but there is no
national law on mob lynching even though India has a long history on lynching.
However, National legislation such as the Constitution of India, the Indian Penal
Code and The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 can be linked with the lynching
offences. National Crimes Records Bureau (NCRB), the principal source of official
statistics on crime in India, does not record the particular cases of lynching. Section
223(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 provides that "persons or a mob
involved in the same offence in the same act can be tried together".However, the
same provision has not been used to deliver justice so far. (Abraham and Rao,
2017).

Incidents of lynching are generally reported under section 302 for murder, 307 for the
attempt to murder, 324 for causing hurt, 147 for rioting of the Indian Penal Code and
so on. Provisions such as section 153A (promoting enmity between groups and acts
prejudicial to maintenance of harmony); 153Bacts prejudicial to maintenance of
national integration), 295A (acts intended to outrage religious feelings); and 295B
(words intended to hurt religious feelings) of the Indian Penal Code are considered
the hate crime law in India. It is noticed that in most of the lynching cases these
provisions have not included in police First Information Reports against the accused.
Moreover, even where hate crime has been recorded under these sections, data is
not provided disaggregated by identity groups. There is no way to know then, the
difference between the 'victim' and the 'perpetrator' in these cases (Citizens against
hate, 2017).

Similar is the case of 'communal violence' that finds mention in NCRB reports, with a
little recording of the agency who was the victim, and who the perpetrators. Lastly, at
best, the above are conservative laws that create an offence, when order and
harmony, are disturbed and religious feelings hurt. There is little that penalizes action
that is 'hate inspired, and which implicitly involves crimes by majority groups against
a vulnerable community. "Hate crimes are acts of violence and intimidation, usually
directed towards already stigmatized and marginalized groups" (Minority Rights
Group, 2014:11).
In effect then, hate crime laws are not power neutral, rather they exist to protect the
vulnerable. The absence of hate crime law in India was acknowledged, when the
Law Commission, in its Criminal Law Amendment Bill 2017, proposed insertion of a
new provision, viz. 153C in the IPC, prohibiting 'incitement to hatred', going beyond
that to incite enmity and disturb national unity. The closest thing in the Indian legal
system to a hate crime law is The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Prevention
of Atrocities Act, 2015, which criminalizes violence and atrocities against Dalits and
indigenous community the most marginalized of Indian society. Hate inspired crimes
against them are then also recorded as SC/ST crimes. But SC/ST Act does not
cover other socially disadvantaged groups in its ambit such as religious, ethnic, and
sexual minorities and the disabled and neither does it cover groups among Muslims
and Christians that consider themselves as Dalits.

Consequently, there is no counting of hate crime against these minorities. In the

absence of official records, it is media reports and the odd scholarly works that are
the main sources of hate crime data against religious minorities in India but these are
not adequate. There are some international and national instruments which support
the victims of mob lynching. Such as Article 7, of Universal Declaration of Human
Rights provides Equality before the law, and equal protection of the law, and the
protection against discrimination. Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights also states that "any advocacy of national, racial or religious
hatred that constitutes an incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be
prohibited by law"

International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination also

in its Article 4 regards the incitement and actions based on ideas of racial superiority
or hatred, among others. Last but not the least, The Indian Constitution under Article
14 guarantees the equality before the law and equal protection by the law, under
Article 15 provides Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, ethnicity, and
gender and under Article 21 laid down the guarantee of life and liberty to all citizens.

Judicial approach:
In Landmark judgment Tehseen S Poonawala and others V. Union of India' on 17
July, 2018, comprising a three-judge bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices
A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud of Supreme Court recommended that the
enactment of special law on mob lynching by the parliament may take place as "fear
of law and veneration for the command of law constitute the foundation of a civilized
society". The present writ petition was preferred under Article 32 of the Constitution
to take immediate and necessary action against the cow protection groups indulging
in violence. During explaining the importance of safeguarding of constitutional and
statutory law, of every individual court, cited the Krishnamoorthy case.

In Krishnamoorthy case of 2015 Supreme Court stated that "the law is the mightiest
sovereign in a civilized society. The majesty of law cannot be sullied simply because
an individual or a group generate the attitude that they have been empowered by the
principles set out in law to take its enforcement into their own hands and gradually
become law unto themselves and punish the violator on their own assumption and in
the manner in which they deem fit." The Court observed that "no one is allowed to
take law into his own hands on the fancy of his shallow spirit of judgment. Just as
one is entitled to fight for his rights in law, the other is entitled to be treated as
innocent till he is found guilty after a fair trial".

In Nandini Sundar and others v. State of Chhattisgarh' Court opined that "it is the
duty of the States, as to strive, incessantly and consistently, to promote fraternity
amongst all citizens so that the dignity of every citizen is protected, nourished and
promoted. Court held that to prevent such incidents is the responsibility of the States.
In Mohd Haroon and others v. Union of India and another case it is held that "it is the
responsibility of the State Administration in association with the intelligence agencies
of both the State and the Centre to prevent recurrence of communal violence in any
part of the State. If any officer responsible for maintaining law and order is found
negligent, he/she should be brought within the ambit of law".

In the present case, the Supreme Court held that "Mob lynching is disrespect to the
rule of law and Constitution values. We may say without any fear of contradiction
that lynching by unruly mobs and barbaric violence arising out of incitement and
instigation cannot be allowed to become the order of the day. Such vigilantism, be it
for whatever purpose or borne out of whatever cause, has the effect of undermining
the legal and formal institutions of the State and altering the constitutional order."

In St. Stephen's College v. University of Delhi', while emphasizing on the significance

of Unity in Diversity, the Court has observed that "the aim of our Constitution is unity
in diversity and to impede any fissiparous tendencies for enriching the unity amongst
Indians by assimilating the diversities. The meaning of diversity in its connotative
expanse of the term would include geographical, religious, linguistic, racial and
cultural differences. It is absolutely necessary to underscore that India represents
social, religious and cultural diversity".

Court in the present case highlighted that there is an urgent need for intervention
from State in protecting the citizen's rights. On the rising intolerance, the apex court
laid down that "a dynamic contemporary constitutional democracy imbibes the
essential features of accommodation pluralism in thought and approach so as to
preserve cohesiveness and unity." Supreme Court observed that "extra-judicial" acts
like "cow vigilantism or any other vigilantism and lynching should be nipped in the
bud and passed guidelines to the Centre and the states. Court also urged Parliament
to frame special legislation to tackle the problems posed by vigilante squads and
said that until then the guidelines would stand the force of law.

The criminal laws face a void as there is no law or arrangement that condemns
mob lynching. In spite of the fact that IPC has arrangements for homicide, blamable
manslaughter, revolting, and unlawful get together yet there is no arrangement for a
gathering that comes by and large to slaughter an individual. Under Section 223(a)
of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), it is conceivable to rebuff at least two charged
perpetrating a similar offense over the span of "a similar exchange." However, the
arrangement misses the mark concerning rebuffing guilty parties of mob lynching .
The National Campaign against mob lynching drafted a Lynching Act, 2017 for
assurance against fierce lynching. Right to non-segregation is assimilated in Article
14, which ensures every individual in the domain of India balance under the watchful
eye of the law and equivalent assurance of laws. Article 15 of the Indian Constitution
forestalls separation of networks dependent on standing, sex, race, or religion.
Occurrences of lynching disregard the privilege to fairness and preclusion
of separation cherished in the Indian Constitution under Article 14 and Article 15,
separately. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution expresses, "No individual will be
denied of his life or individual freedom with the exception of under method set up by
law." The target of Article 21 is to keep the state from denying an individual of his/her
own freedom and life. Nonetheless, the Indian states have neglected to execute the
laws. The broad debasement in law authorization offices, unreasonable
postponements in the removal of cases by the legal executive and the out of line
favorable circumstances to the rich and the predominance in the legal framework
add to inappropriate usage of laws. In practically the entirety of the cases, the police
at first slowed down examinations, overlooked systems, or even assumed a complicit
part in the killings and conceal of wrongdoings. Rather than expeditiously examining
and capturing suspects, the police recorded grievances against casualties, their
families, and observers under laws that boycott dairy cows butcher.

CHAPTER -6

PUNISHMENT FOR LYNCHING

The legal provisions present in our country currently have no laws to deal with
lynching or mob attack, though, the punishment for mob lynching is provided in the
ambit of the following laws currently-
S.302 of IPC–
This S.of IPC deals with punishments related to murder i.e. the person who commits
murder is punished either with a punishment of death or imprisonment for life. In
many cases, the convict may even be liable to penalised.
S.304 of IPC–
This section deals with punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder
which may be Life imprisonment for life. Prison for a time period which may
additionally extend in accordance with public years, or shall also keep obedient
according to high-quality between law the employment is made along an choice after
kill yet cause harm up to expectation is in all likelihood in conformity with reason
death.
S.307 over the IPC–
This section offers including the penalty among lawsuit about strive to murder. A man
or woman whichever toughness does an act along an wish or competencies so much
his work may purpose demise would longevity stability lie defective on homicide and
is in imitation of stay punished together with goal over both for a time period of above
in conformity with people years then also stay subject after penalty.

Sec. 323 of the I.P.C

This segment characterizes the discipline for causing hurt intentionally. Whoever,
aside from whenever incited according to sec. 334, intentionally causes hurt, will
undoubtedly be rebuffed with detainment which may stretch out to one year, or with
fine (up to 1,000 rupees), or with both.

Sec. 325 of the I.P.C

This part manages discipline for causing heinous hurt intentionally. Under the
arrangement of
this part, if an individual, aside from if there should be an occurrence of incitement
(as accommodated by sec. 335), intentionally causes heinous hurt, is probably going
to be rebuffed with detainment of either for a term of as long as seven years and
furthermore installment of fine.

Sec. 34 of the I.P.C

This segment features the discipline for Acts done by a few people in facilitation of
normal aim. At the point when a criminal demonstration is finished by a few people
as to a typical expectation, every one of such people is obligated for that
demonstration in a similar way as though it were finished by only him.

Sec. 120 B of the I.P.C

This segment makes reference to the discipline for parties partaking in a criminal
trick. In the event that the Connivance is accomplished for an offense which is
culpable with death or life detainment or with detainment for a very long time or
more, the wrongdoer is to be rebuffed in a similar way as if there should arise an
occurrence of abetment of the offense. If there should arise an occurrence of
connivance for an offense that isn't culpable with death, life detainment or
detainment for a very long time or over, the wrongdoer is subject to be rebuffed with
detainment for as long as a half year, or with fine or both9

Sec. 143 of the I.P.C

Sec. 141 characterizes 'unlawful gathering' as a get together of at least 5 individuals
so as to utilize/show criminal power or to oppose the execution of law or criminal
trespass and so forth which is culpable under Section 143 of the code with
detainment for as long as a half year, or with fine, or both.
Sec. 147 of the I.P.C

Sec. 146 of the code characterizes 'revolting' as an offense where an unlawful

gathering or a part utilizes power or viciousness in the indictment of a typical object
of the get together. Sec. 147 of the code distinguishes each individual from such a
gathering liable of the offense of revolting and is granted detainment for as long as 2
years, or with fine, or both. If there should arise an occurrence of revolting including
destructive weapons the discipline recommended is for detainment for as long as 3
years, or with fine, or both.

Sec. 149 of the I.P.C-

This segment recognizes each individual from an unlawful get together to be liable of
an offense commit-ted in the arraignment of a typical article if the individuals from
that gathering knew to probably be submitted in indictment of that object.

CHAPTER -7

MOB LYNCHING: A VIGILANTE’S ATTACK ON RULE OF LAW

“In regard to the law of hate speech responsible for inciting communal passions, the
central reality in India is not the abuse of law, but persistent refusal to enforce it.”
‘We the people’ – the opening words of the Constitution, the founding document of
India –sums up the perception of society, of shared culture and history, and of civic
affiliation, a perception that has been questioned throughout the lengthy period of
Indian history. India, the fifth-largest economy in the world, is facing a threat to its
integrity and growth, given the growing incidence of lynching. It is one of those hate
crimes that through structured hate campaigns has become a language of
indoctrinating vigilance. Mob lynching in India is a big religious and politico-legal
crisis for democracy, requiring urgent solutions.Religion, when helped by the political
help, is an instrument used to implant scorn in the brains of people, supporting the
blamed to submit such an offense bravely. There is a recognizable growth in network
powers that have prevailing with regards to spreading savagery by taking
correctional extra-legal measures, with bits of gossip assuming a huge job. The
people are under predictable risk of getting executed or whipped on unimportant
grounds of uncertainty that they have a place with a particular gathering, religion or
position. This mentality changes society into a fundamentalist state, as people, who
choose their chiefs, keep up quietness at gunpoint, eventually fortifying the ethical
authenticity of the guilty parties. A broad, superb record, the Constitution must be
attributed to India's accomplishment as a majority rule self-sufficient nation. This
blessed book is the transcendent report, and it was with the gathering of this sacred
writing, India grasped the 'Rule of the law.' This Rule of law,alongside its
implementation hardware, was alloted the part of insurance of the individuals from
any subjective standard and to give equity to all. The law implementation
organizations can't act subjectively so as to control social conduct, however they are
administered via land law. The essential objective of the law is to have an organized
society where the resident dreams for change and progress is acknowledged, and
the individual yearning discovers space for the declaration of his/her latent capacity.
In such an environment where each resident is qualified for appreciate the rights and
intrigue presented under the established and legal law, he is additionally committed
to remain respectful to the order of the law. In Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Association
of India, the Supreme Court expressed "The greatness of law can't be soiled
essentially in light of the fact that an individual or a gathering produce the disposition
that they have been enabled by the standards set out in law to assume control
over its implementation and bit by bit become law unto themselves and rebuff the
violator on their own suspicion and in the way wherein they regard fit. They overlook
that the organization of law is presented on the law upholding offices and nobody is
permitted to go rogue on the extravagant of his "shallow soul of judgment". Similarly
as one is qualified for battle for his privileges in law, the other is qualified for be
treated as honest till he is seen as liable after a reasonable preliminary. No
demonstration of a resident is to be declared by any sort of network
under the pretense of defenders of law." Assuming control over have been rebuffing
the people in a manner they consider fit. They wind up acting brutally, determined by
their own impression of good and bad. The result of such scenes might be
something as genuine as murder, executed as a rule by a gathering of people and
not an individual. Such a demonstration, driven by outrageous convictions and made
forceful by a purpose to assault some other conviction opposing to it, is, to put it
plainly, mob lynching. Lately, India has seen an extensive ascent in mob lynching
exercises. A lion's share of such occurrences include the unconstrained assault by a
racialized gathering of individuals, who think about the demonstration of the casualty
as a negative mark against the profound underlying foundations of customs and
religion.

CHAPTER -8

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
The Lynching began in the 19th century in the southern United States, when there
was a race strife between slaves and whites. It happened after slaves were
emancipated and whites blamed them for the country's financial catastrophe. Nearly
3446 of the 4743 lynchings took place in the United States. Because whites thought
that allowing blacks too much freedom was unjust, mob violence occurred in the
United States. In 1993, when racial tensions were high in the country, the United
Kingdom, which dominated countries such as India and America, was accused of
vigilant mob lynching when Stephen Lawerence was lynched by a crowd.
Furthermore, due to the lack of strict rules against mob lynching, police officers were
unable to apprehend the perpetrators. This was seen as a failure of justice and the
rule of law, as well as a failure of administrative authority. Another instance occurred
when four white men set fire to a man called Michael because of racial tensions. It is
worth noting, however, that the United Kingdom has had no official reported crime
since 1998.The failure of different law enforcement organizations, including the
police, has aided vigilantes in punishing those accused of crimes such as theft,
robbery, abduction, and housebreaking, among others. Such incidents have
occurred in certain African nations where crime is rampant owing to poverty, a lack of
education, and a lack of work prospects.Even though mob lynching is a novel term in
the Indian context, it has been occurring periodically throughout world culture for
ages. The Lynch Law, which is said to have been initiated by Charles Lynch in the
American community of Lynchburg (Virginia), has been the subject of debate in most
nations throughout the world, particularly in Mexico, Guatemala, Europe, South
Africa, Israel, and Afghanistan. However, it was always regarded as a major foe of
society and hence attempted to be manipulated by it from time to time. In these
nations, mob lynching is often associated with concerns of race, ethnicity, and
nationality. However, mob lynching in India has occurred on several problems that
have been noticed by the country's political parties from their own point of view, and
whether the location is on the road or in the parliament, they utilize it to gain their
own personal political purposes.The fundamental reason for this unique discussion
was that mob lynching were carried out on a huge scale in the form of mass killings
of livestock murderers by a throng of so-called cow-guards. However, in Bihar and
Jharkhand, it has also been reported that a lady was declared a witch, culminating in
her death by savage beating, and in several states, the accused of love jihad was
beaten by the mob. Whatever the motive, no individual or group of individuals has
the authority to take the law into their own hands. The work of punishing a criminal
has been done by the king in the monarchy system and by the courts in the
democratic system, and only after the offender has been convicted. If a person or
group of people is allowed to punish a person who is or appears to be an accused
without giving him the opportunity to be heard, it is a social anarchy, which, if
allowed, will not only give birth to social disorder but will also impede law and order,
which is neither in the interest of a person, nor in the interest of society, and not even
in the interest of the nation. That is why, in the instance of Tahsin, the Supreme
Court issued an instant stern directive against the individuals or groups of individuals
implicated in the mob lynching, and mandated that an investigation be conducted
after filing a FIR under Section 153B of the Indian Penal Code.

CHAPTER -9
CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION

A number of people without having a second thought agree to kill someone shows
the intolerance behavior of Indians which could be developed due to lack of
education and awareness. It has been found that in the cases of mob lynching, most
of the victims are male, female and even children, poor, of a low caste and minority
community. This is very apparent that these are the crimes which are against the
marginalized community of the society. The situation prevailing in India demands a
special law on the violence of mob lynchings.

From Human rights, fundamental rights, to moral rights all the legal instruments have
been talking about the upliftment of the marginalized and excluded sections of the
society. Yet, most of the crimes are place against them. It is an irony that intolerance
of the Indians is of such a level that they consider themselves above law and create
unfavorable circumstances against law and order. Such situations create panic and
terrorize environment in the society which somehow restrain the growth and
development of the society. Belief in the caste system, blind faith in religion and
dependency on superstitions itself shows the intellectual level of the people of India.

To solve out such problems, along with stringent laws there is a need to spread
quality education and awareness among people. The police investigation into most
of mob attack cases in rural India revealed almost similar modus-operandi which
must be improvised. Preservation of life is the most important right for an individual
and the state has to protect it. The preventive, remedial and punitive measures laid
down by the Supreme Court must be followed strictly. The role of media, civil
societies and NGO's must enhance in a positive direction. These kind incidents are a
blot on the face of our democracy because we have a democracy, not mobocracy in
India.

BIBLIOGRAPHY