Each Inhumane Incident Of Degrading Woman Accused Of Witchcraft Is A Blot On Constitutional Spirit: SC Puts Accused Men On Trial

The Apex Court referred to an essay of the English Philosopher John Stuart Mill on Subjection of Women wherein he writes “the legal subordination of one sex to another — is wrong in itself.”

The Division Bench comprising Justice C.T. Ravikumar & Justice Sanjay Karol said, “Given the vulgarity of what the two women had to endure, we may say nothing more but express our surprise as to why the State chose not to assail the nonspeaking order of the High Court granting stay in favour of the accused before this Court.

The First Information Report in this case was lodged in the year 2020 under Sections 341, 323, 354, 354B, 379, 504, 506, 149 of Indian Penal Code, 18604 and Section 3&4 of the Witch (Daain) Act against 13 persons. The victim woman was subjected to grave accusations and also disrobed and assaulted in public. She was accused of witchcraft and was abused physically and verbally as well. Another person who was present amidst all this disturbance was also disrobed, and her jewelery was snatched.

The Police, upon investigation, filed a chargesheet against only one person, namely, Lakhpati Devi and observed that none of the others were to be sent up for trial. The ACJM, upon perusal of the case records, took cognizance against all the persons named in the FIR. The Sessions Judge declined to interfere with the order of cognizance. The accused persons preferred Criminal Miscellaneous Petition before the High Court of Judicature at Patna under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing thereof. The complainant, aggrieved by the stay granted by the High Court, approached the Apex Court.

The Court, at the outset, said, “...we may observe that even though the Criminal Miscellaneous petition now stands withdrawn, this Court is aghast as to how the High Court, in its wisdom, saw it fit to grant a stay against proceedings qua the accused persons.”

It was also explained by the Bench that a Court granting a stay of proceedings is not to grant a stay in a mechanical manner. The sum total of circumstances both for and against need to be examined to check as to whether a prima facie case for stay is made out or not, or in other words, whether the non-grant of stay is to somehow prejudice the party, etc.

The Bench observed that the FIR recorded that the authorities did not heed the complainant’s request for the registration of an FIR and that recourse had to be taken to Section 156(3) of CrPC. A further peculiar situation came to be when out of the 13 accused persons, only one person, whose name incidentally did not feature directly as having acted against the victims physically or verbally, was sent up for trial i.e. Lakhpati Devi and those against whom direct allegations have been made in the complaint/FIR were let go scot-free. The chargesheet did not disclose any reason as to why the investigating authorities adopted such a course of action.

“The State’s decision to litigate an issue should not depend on the benefit that may be derived either to the State exchequer or elsewhere but also should be reflected of its responsibility to protect, within its people the respect for the rule of law and justice for all”, the Bench further said.

Reference was also placed upon Article 51(c) of the Constitution which enjoins upon the State the responsibility to foster respect for International Law and treaty obligations. Reliance was also placed upon the International Laws. Noting the fact that India is the signatory to International Covenant on Civil and Protection Rights Convention on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women13 and Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Bench said, “The protection of dignity for all human beings as also the protection of women against discrimination form important parts of obligations under International Law in so far as India is concerned.”

Coming to grave humiliation sustained by the victim on the allegations of withcraft, the Bench said, “Witchcraft, of which one of the victims stands accused, is certainly one such practice which should be shunned. Such allegations have a long past often with tragic consequences for those subjected to them. Witchcraft is deeply intertwined with superstition, patriarchy and social control, leaving it to no manner of surprise that such allegations were most often directed against women who were either widows or elderly.”

The Court also shed light on the yearly report as per NCRB on such cases and said, “Although the numbers referred to above may seem insignificant, however, even 102 or 85, whatever the number may be, of reported inhumane, degrading incidents, each of them is a blot on the constitutional spirit. Those many persons were targeted and possibly exploited and abused on the basis of superstitions, conjecture and entirely unfounded beliefs which go against the scientific temper that each and every citizen of India called upon to foster within oneself and also within their own communities. The other number presented, i.e. the number of incidents reported under Section 354-B IPC, is deeply anguishing.” Heavy reliance was also placed upon a report of the Office of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights submitted to the Council in its 52nd session titled ‘Study on the situation of the violations and abuses of human rights rooted in harmful practices related to accusations of witchcraft and ritual attacks, as well as stigmatization.'

Thus, the Bench asked the matter to be placed on the file of the concerned District Court and ordered that the Trial against the accused persons shall proceed on a day-to-day basis. The accused persons are directed to appear before the Trial Court on January 15, 2025.

Cause Title: Rajeev Kumar Upadhyay v. Srikant Upadhyay & ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1008)

Click here to read/ download Judgment