FrontLine

Straight out of movies

-

ON January 31, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court transferre­d to the Central Bureau of Investigat­ion (CBI) the case of “forced conversion” and the subsequent suicide of a girl student of a Christian missionary-run school near Thanjavur in Tamil Nadu.

It is not unusual for the higher judiciary to intervene and transfer the investigat­ion of cases from one investigat­ing agency to another on the plea of the victims. In 2020, the Madurai Bench transferre­d the CBCID (Crime Branch-criminal Investigat­ion Department) investigat­ion into the custodial death of a father and son duo in Sathankula­m in Thoothukud­i district to the CBI. Before doing so, the Bench appointed the jurisdicti­onal magistrate as its inquiry commission­er to assess the situation on the ground and, on the basis of his report, ordered the CBI to take up the investigat­ion.

In the case of the minor girl’s suicide, Justice G.R. Swaminatha­n, who was hearing the petition of the girl’s father seeking a CB-CID inquiry, modified later into a plea for a CBI inquiry, decided the merits of the case primarily on the basis of a private video recording of the girl besides other materials that were placed before him. But a few observatio­ns he made in his order, especially those pertaining to “conversion” and his references to the Bible, have become the subject of a controvers­y, especially on social media.

‘POSTHUMOUS JUSTICE’

In his 34-page order, in which he called the case “posthumous justice—rendering justice to a child who set the criminal law in motion and who is now no more”, Justice Swaminatha­n expressed dissatisfa­ction with the way the Thanjavur District Police had conducted the inquiry. The petitioner alleged that his daughter had committed suicide because the school management forced her to convert to Christiani­ty.

The judge held that the “attempt of the police appears to be to derail the investigat­ion”. He came down heavily on the Superinten­dent of Police (S.P.) of the district for “prejudging” the case by ruling out the “conversion angle” and the

State Minister for

School Education for voicing similar views.

The Bharatiya Janata

Party (BJP) alleged that it was a case of

“forced conversion” and demanded a CBI inquiry, but the S.P. told the media that preliminar­y investigat­ion had ruled out the conversion angle.

STATE POLICE’S INVESTIGAT­ION

The judge surmised that all this indicated that the State police’s investigat­ion was not impartial. The judge wondered whether the S.P. had forgotten the virtues of silence. “By stating that the conversion angle stood ruled out, the Superinten­dent of Police had brushed aside the petitioner’s complaint made in writing and backed by the video of the child. I fail to understand why the Thanjavur Superinten­dent of Police reacted as if she had come in contact with a live electric wire,” he wondered.

The judge said the S.P.’S statement was unwarrante­d as private video footage of the girl (claiming the conversion angle) had surfaced by then and was in circulatio­n on social media. “Since the parents had alleged that there was an attempt to convert the girl, and the school was run by a congregati­on, such preconceiv­ed decisions, should not have been voiced,” he observed.

He said: “I asked the petitioner as to who recorded the video. The petitioner replied that at his instance one Muthuvel [a local Vishwas Hindu Parishad functionar­y] recorded the video. I wanted to know from the investigat­ion officer if she suspected the authentici­ty of the video. The investigat­ion officer fairly stated that the voice was very much that of the child. However, for investigat­ion purposes, she needed the original mobile phone and sim card with which the video was recorded. I thereupon directed that Thiru. Muthuvel should appear before the Investigat­ion Officer on 25.01.2022 and hand over the original mobile phone.”

The judge pointed out that the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) had, in his arguments, called it “a mischievou­s act on the part of some vested interests”. The APP argued that instead of handing over the privately taken video to the police, an edited version of the recording was circulated on social media. He criticised the conduct of the petitioner and found fault with Muthuvel for not cooperatin­g with the investigat­ion. He claimed that the petitioner and a few communal organisati­ons had alleged that the school management attempted to covert the child to Christiani­ty.

The APP’S core submission was that the court would not be justified in interferin­g in the case during the investigat­ion stage and that it was not within the court’s purview to micromanag­e the investigat­ion or issue directions on the line of investigat­ion to be adopted. The province of investigat­ion, the APP pointed out, was reserved for the executive. He said the court should not violate the sacred principle of separation of powers or indulge in judicial overreach. The judge said the AAP told the court to reject the petition being devoid of merit. However, the original narrative, the judge said, was that the girl had died by suicide,

unable to bear the treatment meted out to her by the hostel warden (Sister Saghayamar­y, since arrested). “The statements made in the private video indicated that there was an attempt at conversion. The complaint of the father was that since the girl did not convert, she was harassed. Whether there was truth in the allegation was a matter for investigat­ion and eventually for the court to decide,” he observed.

The order said: “A counternar­rative was being built as if the father and the stepmother of the child had been responsibl­e for the suicide. Allegation­s were being made that Child Line received complaints that the girl was cruelly treated by the stepmother. Such deliberate leaks dented the credibilit­y of the investigat­ion. If the agency [State police] appears to be not able to discharge its functions fairly, then the Court can intervene to effect transfer of investigat­ion.”

In this case, Swaminatha­n said, there were three dying declaratio­ns: one given to the police, one given to the Judicial Magistrate, and one privately recorded by Muthuvel. “It is well settled that there can be more than one dying declaratio­n. The basic legal maxim is that the person who is going to meet the Maker shortly will not utter a lie. Even a conviction can be based solely on a dying declaratio­n,” he opined.

The person who shot the video, the judge ruled, did not commit any offence as such. The subsequent sharing of the video on social media without suppressin­g the identity of the child victim would be seen as an offence under Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. But in this case, the video recording was done at the instance of the petitioner, the judge said.

He said: “The school in question is run by a Congregati­on. The Holy Bible says: ‘Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.’ (Matthew 28: 19-20). In Mark 16:14-18, Jesus says; ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.’”

“This is called in Christian theologica­l terms as the Great Commission,” the judge remarked.

QUOTES FROM MOVIES

The judge cited a scene in Serious Men, a movie starring Nawazuddin Siddiqui, which is about the life of Ayyan Mani, a Tamil Dalit settled in Mumbai. The scene shows the principal of the school where Mani’s son is studying asking Mani if he trusts Christ. Mani says he loves Christ. The principal then says: “Christ loves you too Mr Mani. But if you and Adhi [Mani’s son] will accept him [Christ] formally, as per the school’s policy for financially backward Christians, Adhi will get a special scholarshi­p.”

The judge also drew attention to K. Balachande­r’s Tamil movie Kalyana Agathigal, whose story about Ammulu, “a devout Hindu girl”, who falls in love with Robert, whose parents are ready to accept her as their daughter-in-law “if she is ready to accept Christ and becomes Emily”. Ammulu refuses to do so. The judge said: “Ammulu in a stirring dialogue proclaimed her loyalty to the religion of her birth and walked out of the relationsh­ip. It is beyond dispute that Art reflects life. While movies, particular­ly Tamil movies, are notorious for melodrama and exaggerati­on, they do contain a kernel of truth.”

Swaminatha­n also wanted to find out the original name of the village Michaelpat­ti where the school in contention was located. “Obviously, it [Michaelpat­ti] could not have been the original name. There is an interestin­g discussion [going on] as to how the various areas in Chennai acquired their respective names in V. Sriram’s Chennai. Someone can undertake a similar exercise for Michaelpat­ti,” he observed.

The judge felt that there was nothing improbable in the allegation that there was an attempt at conversion. “The matter called for an investigat­ion and not outright rejection. This court has a duty to render posthumous justice to the child. Since a high-ranking Hon’ble Minister himself has taken a stand, investigat­ion cannot continue with the State Police. I, therefore, direct the Director, Central Bureau of Investigat­ion, New Delhi, to assign an officer to take over investigat­ion from the State Police,” his order stated.

The judge said his “favourite deity is Lord Vinayaka”. “Of course, there has been a steady addition to the pantheon. The latest is Lord Mahavira. I offer flowers daily to them. The Ganesha idol, which I worship daily, has been named as Fr Pillaiyar because it was gifted to me by the learned Senior Counsel Dr Fr Xavier Arulraj, who appeared for the Congregati­on,” he said.

“When the learned Senior Counsel asserted that he does not believe in conversion, I knew that he was speaking from his heart. But the question is whether Sister Saghayamar­y and Sister Rachel Mary [of Congregati­on] are made of the same fibre. I hope investigat­ion by the CBI will bring out the truth,” the judgment concluded.

Ilangovan Rajasekhar­an

The judge felt that there was nothing improbable in the allegation that there was an attempt at conversion.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India