In the face of strong public criticism, Mumbai's Police Chief Rakesh Maria has ordered an inquiry into the shameful raids by cops on hotels and resorts in Madh Island and Aksa, and the subsequent arrest of 40 couples. But does it really require an inquiry to establish that the raids were illegal, unwarranted and an outright assault on the right to privacy?
The prima facie evidence that those arrested were adults in consensual relationships is enough to ensure the immediate punishment of the officers who ordered and led the raid, and to ensure fair compensation to the couples concerned. But this is unlikely to happen. The inquiry being conducted by the police itself will end up justifying the raids on the basis of "local complaints by residents".
The criminality of moral policing by men in uniform in this case is, according to the police, perfectly legal, backed by the Bombay Police Act, which was adopted in 1951. The couples were arrested under Sec 110 of this Act on grounds of "indecency." This section states "that no person shall willfully and indecently expose his person in any street or public place or within sight of and in such manner as to be seen from, any street or public place, whether from within any house or building or not, or use indecent language or behave indecently or riotously, or in a disorderly manner in a street or place of public resort or in any office, station or station house."
In this case the Section does not apply at all since the couples were in private rooms behind closed doors, which the police forced open. Therefore there was no "indecent" behavior which the police or anyone else were witness to.
So what was indecent? According to
media reports, the police forced young couples to call their parents, or in one instance a young woman had to explain to the police that the person she was with was her fiance; who she was going to marry in a few months.
In other words what was "indecent" to the Mumbai police was that the couples did not have marriage certificates framed on the wall which alone, according to them, makes sex permissible. A sort of AADHAAR card for sex! And therefore they can bully, harass, intimidate, humiliate, threaten and then finally arrest anyone from the privacy of a closed room, it could even be a home.
The problem is that they have the legal authority to do so. The Bombay Police Act does not define "indecency". In
Clause 2, it has 17 definitions from what are "cattle" to "eating houses" and "vehicles", but not a word about what constitutes "indecency." Presumably in 1951, it was taken for granted that the police had the required knowledge and therefore the complete authority to decide what is "indecency."
You don't need
khap panchayats when you have the Mumbai police armed with Sec 110 of the Bombay Police Act.
The law is an affront to democracy. It should be scrapped without any further delay. This case highlights the urgency of it. The Maharashtra Chief Minister should start taking the required steps.
The other important aspect is the right to privacy. Will the Maharashtra Government have the political will to defend an ordinary citizen's right to privacy? The question gains relevance because right now the Central Government has taken a position in a case before the Supreme Court that the right to privacy is not a fundamental right guaranteed by the constitution.
The case is based on a bunch of petitions which challenges the collection of biometric information for AADHAAR cards, which the petitioners rightly argue, constitutes an invasion of the right to privacy and is also open to misuse. The Centre's Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi argued on behalf of the Government that the right to privacy is not a fundamental right granted by the Constitution. In response, one of the three judges on the Bench stated in open court "If a man is not safe in his own house, then what remains in Article 21 (right to life and liberty)? Where is the liberty then? If privacy is not there in liberty, then what else can be there? To say that it (right to privacy) is not at all there will not be right. We will not accept it."
A central government which does not believe in the right to privacy, a state government which refuses to publicly condemn moral policing by its own police force thereby supporting such actions, a police force that has the right to interpret "indecency" as it wishes, political forces that periodically incite lynch mobs to act to protect their perverted understanding of "Indian culture" ... all of this makes a deadly cocktail for the abuse of power.
The Malwani police raids were not just insulting to the couples involved, they pose a challenge to the very concept of democracy.
(Brinda Karat is a Politburo member of the CPI(M) and a former Member of the Rajya Sabha.)Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.