ADVERTISEMENTREMOVE AD
Members Only
lock close icon

Zakia Jafri Case: Can Rule of Law Survive if We Crush Those Fighting for It?

The vehemence of the court in saying that persons assisting the widow should be ‘put in the dock’ is inexplicable.

Published: 
story-hero-img
i
Aa
Aa
Small
Aa
Medium
Aa
Large

“It is necessary for us all, the citizens of the world, to work tirelessly to sustain and further the liberty, freedom and democracy our forefathers have fought for.”

– Chief Justice NV Ramana at Independence Hall, Philadelphia, summer of 2022.

Justice Ramana is set to retire shortly. His exhortation to citizens to dedicate themselves to the cause of liberty ironically comes at a time when persons perceived by a large section of civil society to be doing exactly what is asked of citizens by the Chief Justice – defending “liberty, freedom and democracy” – have faced judicial strictures and sudden arrests.

Ehsan Jafri, a former legislator, was burnt to death during the Gujarat riots of 2002 as his pleas for state assistance fell on deaf ears. A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, in Zakia Ahsan Jafri v State of Gujarat, while turning down the demand for an investigation by his widow, Zakia Jafri, made observations to the effect that persons who were alleged whistleblowers of the complicity of the highest decision-makers in the state government and those who were advocating action against such persons and assisting Jafri in her quest to seek justice for her husband were, in fact, “involved” in “abuse of process” and needed to be “in the dock and proceeded with in accordance with law”.

Become a Member to unlock
  • Access to all paywalled content on site
  • Ad-free experience across The Quint
  • Listen to paywalled content
  • Early previews of our Special Projects
×
×