Introduction
The Bhima Koregaon incident refers to a significant event in Indian history and contemporary discourse, rooted in the broader narratives of caste dynamics, historical resistance, and social justice. The violence at Bhima Koregaon on January 1, 2018, serves as a stark reminder of the fragility of justice, the challenges faced by the judiciary, and the enduring quest for freedom in India. The event not only marked the bicentenary of the historic Battle of Bhima Koregaon but also exposed deep societal fissures that challenge the ideals enshrined in the Indian Constitution. The incident, along with subsequent arrests of activists, intellectuals, and alleged links to Maoist groups, has highlighted deep societal fissures and prompted discussions about democracy, dissent, and justice. This incident is not just a reflection of historical memory but also a contemporary lens to examine India’s complex socio-political fabric.
Incident on 1st January 2018 (200th anniversary of the Battle of Bhima Koregaon)
The Events of January 1, 2018
On January 1, 2018, over 200,000 people gathered at Bhima Koregaon, a small village in Maharashtra, to commemorate the bicentenary of the historic Battle of Bhima Koregaon. The victory pillar, known as the Vijay Stambh, serves as a memorial for Dalit soldiers who fought alongside the British East India Company against the Peshwa-led Maratha forces in 1818. The occasion attracted Dalit groups, activists, and visitors from across the country, transforming the event into a symbol of resistance against caste-based oppression.
What began as a peaceful celebration took a violent turn when clashes erupted near the memorial site. According to reports, members of right-wing groups allegedly incited the violence by pelting stones, attacking vehicles, and targeting attendees. Several Dalit participants were injured in the attacks, shattering the spirit of the commemorative event.
This unrest had a far-reaching consequence, sparking protests and shutdowns in various parts of Maharashtra, including Pune, Mumbai, and Aurangabad. Dalit groups, outraged by the violence, called for a statewide bandh (strike) on January 3, 2018. The bandh witnessed widespread participation, disrupting normal life and drawing national attention to the plight of marginalized communities.
Justice Delayed; Justice Denied?
The aftermath of the incident saw legal cases and investigations, but the wheels of justice turned slowly. Activists and Dalit leaders alleged that the judiciary’s response to the violence was mired in bias, with delayed action against perpetrators and swift arrests of those accused of dissent. High-profile arrests of intellectuals and activists under charges of alleged Maoist links were seen by many as an attempt to suppress voices advocating for social justice.
The judiciary, tasked with being the guardian of constitutional rights, found itself at the centre of criticism. The perceived lack of accountability for those responsible for inciting violence and the swift crackdown on dissenting voices raised serious concerns about selective justice. These incidents underscored the need for an impartial judiciary that prioritizes justice over political convenience.
Legal Points and Fundamental rights involved in the case:
Right to Life and Personal Liberty (Article 21)
Arrests Under UAPA: Activists arrested under UAPA faced prolonged detention without bail, raising concerns about arbitrary deprivation of liberty.
Death of Stan Swamy: The delayed response to Swamy’s medical condition highlighted systemic issues in ensuring the right to life and dignity for those in custody.
Equality Before Law (Article 14)
Dalit Witness Death: The death of a Dalit witness and allegations of systemic caste-based bias in the handling of the case raised concerns about unequal treatment of marginalized communities.
Right to Protest (Article 19(1)(b))
Bandh and Protests: The statewide bandh and subsequent protests following the violence were met with police action. The arrests of protesters raised concerns about the freedom to assemble peacefully.
Digital Privacy and Evidence Tampering
Legal Issue: The planting of evidence on Rona Wilson’s laptop using malware raises serious questions about the violation of privacy rights (recognized under Article 21) and the reliability of digital evidence.
Concerns: This case emphasizes the need for stringent guidelines on the admissibility and integrity of digital evidence in criminal trials.
Federalism and State Autonomy
Contention: The transfer of the investigation to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) without the Maharashtra government’s consent violated the principles of federalism. This raised questions about the balance of power between the Center and the State.
Legal Dispute: Whether the Union government overstepped its authority in taking over the case from the state.
Right Against Arbitrary Arrest and Detention (Article 22)
Contention: Activists were accused of being linked to Maoist organizations without substantive evidence. Allegations of planted digital evidence, as revealed by forensic experts, questioned the validity of the arrests.
Abuse of Preventive Laws: UAPA’s stringent provisions, including extended detention periods without charges, were criticized for bypassing safeguards against arbitrary detention.
Aftermath Synopsis
FIRs and Allegations:
On January 2, 2018, an FIR was filed against Sambhaji Bhide and Milind Ekbote for allegedly instigating violence against Dalits.
On January 8, 2018, another FIR was filed against Kabir Kala Manch members for allegedly making provocative statements at the Elgar Parishad.
Milind Ekbote Investigation:
In February 2018, the Supreme Court criticized the slow progress in locating Milind Ekbote despite extensive police efforts.
On March 14, 2018, Ekbote was arrested after the Supreme Court cancelled his interim bail for non-cooperation with investigators.
Dalit Witness Death:
On April 22, 2018, a 19-year-old Dalit witness, whose house was burned in the violence, was found dead. Her family alleged pressure to withdraw her statement.
Arrests of Activists:
In June 2018, Rona Wilson was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
In August 2018, five activists, including Varavara Rao, Sudha Bharadwaj, and Gautam Navlakha, were arrested for alleged Maoist ties and links to the Bhima Koregaon incident.
Government Actions:
In January 2020, the newly elected Maharashtra government proposed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe, but the case was taken over by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) on January 25, 2020, leading to disagreements between the state and central governments.
Chargesheet and Accusations:
In October 2020, the NIA filed a 10,000-page chargesheet accusing activists, including Stan Swamy, of links to Maoists and conspiracies against the central government.
Forensic Report:
A report by Arsenal Consulting revealed that evidence against Rona Wilson was planted on his laptop using malware, with his device compromised for over 22 months.
What the 3-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court says?
On September 28th 2018, a 3-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud delivered a split decision in the Bhima Koregaon Case. Justice Khanwilkar delivered the majority opinion on behalf of himself and CJI Misra. Justice Chandrachud authored the dissenting opinion.
On 29th August 2018,five eminent personalities—Romila Thapar, Devaki Jain, Prabhat Patnaik, Satish Deshpande and Maja Dharuwala—filed a writ petition challenging the arrests of five well known human right activists—Gautam Navalakha, Sudha Bharadwaj, Varavara Rao, Arun Ferreira and Vernon Gonsalves—under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). They were accused of inciting the Bhima Koregaon violence and having links with the banned terrorist organisation, Communist Party of India (Maoist). The petition prayed for the release of the accused and the appointment of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) for further inquiry.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Bhima Koregaon case is not just about an incident of violence—it is a mirror reflecting the deeper challenges within our society and legal system. It raises pressing questions about justice, equality, and the protection of fundamental rights.
As we reflect on the events and their aftermath, we must reaffirm our commitment to upholding the principles enshrined in our Constitution: the right to life, liberty, and dignity for all, the freedom to dissent, and the pursuit of justice without bias.
Let us remember that a just society is built not only by enforcing laws but by ensuring that every individual, regardless of their background, can trust in the fairness and impartiality of our institutions.
The fight for justice in Bhima Koregaon is not just about the past—it is about securing a future where equality, freedom, and the rule of law prevail for generations to come.