The Rule Innocent Until Proven Guilty Was Ignored In Stan Swamy's Case
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
View all posts by this Author
By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2021-07-06 07:14:09
About the Author
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
View all posts by this Author
The death of 84-year-old activist Stan Swamy in detention (although he died of a cardiac arrest in a hospital in Mumbai where he was being treated for various medical conditions), while being tragic, is also a severe indictment of the criminal justice system in India. The administration, the judiciary, the investigating agencies and the jail authorities are all responsible for keeping the octogenarian incarcerated for no valid reason, despite his failing health and the Covid situation.
The main point is that if Swamy was arrested for his role in the Elgar Parishad case (the chargesheet accuses him of being fully involved with the banned outfit CPI-Maoists and actively recruiting and training cadre to take up arms against the state and the main instigator of the Bhima-Koregaon violence), why was he kept in jail without being interrogated? Every time his bail application was moved, the NIA opposed it. Yet, it never sought custody, not even for one day, to question him. If he was not needed for questioning, what was the reason for keeping him in jail and opposing his bail plea? It was not as if he would have run away or threatened witnesses or tampered with evidence. An undertaking that he would be available for questioning whenever required would have been enough to free him. But the judiciary failed to bat for his rights. Others in the same case have also not been freed. Why is the rule "bail, not jail" being applied selectively?
The most distressing fact was that when he applied for using a straw to drink water as he was unable to drink from a glass due to advanced stage of Parkinson's, the hearing was delayed by three weeks. One fails to understand why the matter reached the courts. Jail authorities are notorious for providing mobile phones, television sets and other things to prisoners for a consideration. Why could they not be civil enough to provide a straw to the old man when he was visibly unable to drink from a glass?
In his last bail plea before the Bombay HC, Swamy had informed the court that the situation in Taloja jail was such that his condition had deteriorated and he would probably die. His request to be allowed medical bail to go to Ranchi has still not been heard. His death is a stark reminder that judicial priorities are loaded against the common man. The Elgar Parishad case is also an example of how people are picked up under draconian laws, kept in jail and yet no charges are framed against them for months. When charges are framed, the trials do not begin even after months, and sometimes years, pass by. The system needs to be overhauled. If we see jails as correctional homes and do not deny rights even to convicted prisoners, why deny them to under-trials whose guilt has not been proved? Stan Swamy was held guilty without trial by the system, ignoring the basic right of a person to be considered innocent until proven guilty.
