Political correctness, as imposed by left-liberals, demands a conspiratorial silence over Savan Rathod’s death, even as the deceased Rohith Vemula is remembered raucously, lest we betray the ideals of our socialist, secular republic
The past fortnight has seen an unending series of reports, accompanied by commentary, analyses and opinion masquerading as fact, on the unfortunate death of a student at University of Hyderabad. In the spurious debate that has followed Rohith Vemula’s death, goal posts have been shifted repeatedly with twin objectives: To avoid addressing the real issues behind the alleged suicide, namely the rancid state of affairs in tax-funded institutions of learning, and, linked to that, the festering cesspool of what passes for student politics.
Politicians descending on the university campus like vultures who have smelled a meal of dead and decaying flesh, have added to the obfuscation, peddling fiction to pander ersatz outrage. We saw that at Dadri too. Some deaths in this benighted land tend to capture the attention of the commentariat, and hence that of politicians for whom the national interest is secondary to crass politics of cynicism.
The Dalits (as Scheduled Castes whom Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi called the Harijan, children of god, are now referred to by activists and politicians) continue to suffer because in their suffering lies redemption for politicians. Had caste ceased to matter, had society become free of debilitating identities, had empowerment and enablement ensured equal opportunity, both activists living off Dalit misery and politicians trading in Dalit votes would have been beggared. We could say the same about India’s religious minorities, including Muslims, the least of all minorities.
Entitlement is clearly not the solution, but who’s to stand up and say this and be spat uponIJ Education is the solution, but who’s to believe this given our ramshackle tax-funded system where bogus rights like ‘Right to Education’ have become a substitute for knowledge dissemination and skill acquisitionIJ The Allahabad High Court had ruled that everybody holding public office, whether lawmakers and bureaucrats, police or judges, must send their children to Government schools. The order, flawed because it restricts freedom of choice, was meant to force improvement. We haven’t heard any further on that lofty directive.
But if it is death that obsesses us, instead of how to make life, and living, better for all, then we really should be undiscriminating. Instead, the self-appointed guardians of society, the sanctimonious mainstream media, the virtuous army of the righteous, the politicians who constantly connive to feather their own nests and further their own interests, pick and choose the dead to feast upon. And so it is that while buckets of glycerine tears are shed for Rohith
Vemula, not a word (barring the odd story) is heard about Savan Dharma Rathod. Neither of them deserved to die at a young age for no fault of theirs. Yet while one is remembered raucously in death, the other is ignored. Political correctness, as imposed by the intolerant left-liberals, demands that we speak out about Rohith but maintain a conspiratorial silence over Savan lest we betray the noble ideals of our socialist, secular republic.
Since this column has never been accused of being politically correct, it would be perfectly fine to tell the other story here. The details are culled from the few reports that have appeared in media, including The Indian Express which, to its credit, had the most comprehensive story. So here is Savan’s tragic tale.
On January 13, Savan, a 17-year-old boy (some reports suggest he was 16) belonging to the Banjara community, who had run away from home to make a living scavenging waste in Pune, was accosted by three men. Initial reports said Savan was accused of theft and burned alive. Subsequent reports, quoting his dying declaration, said the three killers asked him if he was a Hindu; when he replied in the affirmative, they poured petrol on him and set him ablaze. The barely alive boy was dumped near a dargah where he was spotted by a group of ragpickers. Savan died in a hospital of the terrible burns he had suffered.
The FIR registered with the police says “he was set on fire by three persons who suspected that he was stealing batteries of vehicles on the street”. Those three persons are Ibrahim Mehboob Shaikh (35), Imran Tamboli (28) and his brother Zuber Tamboli (26). They were arrested by the police and possibly the incident would have been filed and forgotten but for a video tape that surfaced and went viral. The minute-long video, shot on a mobile phone, shows Savan saying, “I was working with my family in Pandhapur. I had a dispute with them and came to Pune looking for work… While I was taking a leak, three persons objected and asked me my name. I said Savan Rathod. They asked me if I am Hindu. I said, yes. Then they poured something over me from a can and set me on fire.” According to the report in The Indian Express, “The person, recording the video, asks Savan if he feels that he was burnt because he is a Hindu. To this, Savan is seen moving his head in affirmation in the video.”
Who shot the videoIJ The police should have recorded Savan’s statement in the presence of a Magistrate but they did not do so for reasons best known to them. Perhaps a poor Banjara boy is not deserving of such attention. So who thought of recording Savan’s dying declarationIJ Apparently, an advocate, Ramesh Rathod, who is a leader of Banjara community in Pune, who recorded the video along with some of his friends. The Indian Express quotes him saying, “We recorded the video around 11.30 pm on Thursday (January 14) and it is like a dying declaration. He died the next day morning. We have given the video to the police demanding proper investigation. Had the assailants believed he was a thief, they would not have asked his religion. They would have handed him over to the police. Instead, they set him on fire. They had not consumed liquor and were fully conscious. So, we suspect they had communal intention..After recording the video, we asked the police to record his statement. But police said that Savan himself is the complainant in the FIR.”
The Deputy Commisdioner of Police Tushar Doshi has a slightly different take: “Our investigation has revealed that Ibrahim first spotted Savan. later, the Tamboli brothers joined him. For over two hours, they questioned Savan regarding theft and took him to various spots. We have confirmed at least two spots where they took Savan. Then they forcibly made him drink petrol and set him on fire. It is confirmed they were suspecting theft. We have probed on possible extremist links. So far, we have found nothing of this sort. As of now, there is nothing to believe that assailants had communal intentions. The probe is still on.”
Even if Savan was suspected of petty theft, does that justify setting him ablazeIJ Did his tormentors indulge in a horrific crime, confident that killing a poor Banjara boy would not fetch them severe punishmentIJ Were they sure the police would go easy on them because the administration would not want to incur the wrath of the Muslim communityIJ What does ‘extremist links’ have to do with three Muslim men setting a Hindu boy on fireIJ Since when has that become a pre-requisite to label a crime as communalIJ Did the arsonists who set fire to coach S6 of Sabarmati Express, burning alive its occupants, at Godhra have ‘extremist links’IJ Does not having ‘extremist links’ absolve Mehboob Shaikh, Imran Tamboli and Zuber Tamboli of their hideous crimeIJ And last though not the least, who will speak up and speak out for Savan Dharma RathodIJ
(The writer is a current affairs analyst based in NCR)
