"What Kind Of Democracy Is This?" HC Pulls Maharashtra Police For Action Against Prof Who Referred To Slain Activist Govind Pansare's Book

What kind of a democracy is this? the Bombay High Court questioned after noting that a lady Professor was subjected to departmental enquiry on a letter written by the local police to her College after she referred to a book "Shivaji Kon Hota" (Who was Shivaji?) written by comrade Govind Pansare.

A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan pulled up the Maharashtra Police for writing a letter to the educational institution to take action against the petitioner Professor - Dr Mrunalini Aher, as she referred to a book "Shivaji Kon Hota" to pacify students, who had attacked another professor for their speech on venerable personalities.

"What kind of a democracy is this?" Justice Mohite-Dere questioned Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegavkar, who appeared for the Police.

The judges lost cool after noting that it was only pursuant to the letter written by the Police, the College initiated departmental enquiry against the petitioner, a Professor of English at the Yashwantrao Chavan College.

"Have you read the book (in question)?" Justice Chavan asked the investigating officer, present in the courthall.

The judge sought to know the qualification of the officer, who responded that he holds a Bachelor's degree in English.

"So just because you studied English, have you forgotten Marathi literature and culture? Read that book, read the Constitution of India and specially Article 19(1)(a) (right to free speech) and then inform us if an offence is made out in this case," an enraged Justice Chavan told the officer.

The judge further noted from the impugned communication, which was in Marathi language and had some spelling mistakes.

"What is this? You do not know the basic Marathi language? If you do not know your own mother tongue how can we expect that you will be knowing the law then?" Justice Chavan orally remarked.

The bench impressed upon Venegavkar that the police in the instant case has "exceeded" its powers and thus the communication needs to be withdrawn.

"You have exceeded your powers. It is because of your letter she is facing all this. You cannot be asking a private institution to take action against any one. You could not have issued such directions at all. You could have taken action on your own and not ordered an educational institution to do this," Justice Mohite-Dere said.

The judges further noted that the police justified it's action of writing a letter to the principal under section 149 (pro-active role of the police to prevent a crime) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The judges said that there was no reason to invoke the provision as there was no ocassion that the petitioner would have addressed any audience or resorted to some crime.

"By no stretch of imagination section 149 could have been invoked. This is complete haphazardness. We aren't impressed with this at all," Justice Mohite-Dere observed.

The judges, therefore, asked Venegavkar to either get the communication withdrawn or else it will pass strictures against the police.

"We will not shy from quashing such a letter and also not hesitate to pass strictures against the officers," the bench cautioned Venegavkar, who later on informed the judges on instructions from the District Superintendent of Satara, that the letter would be withdrawn unconditionally. The judges took the statement on record and disposed of the plea.

Background:

The petitioner was part of a lecture on August Kranti Day was arranged in the college and one Prof Dr Vinayakrao Jadhav addressed the students. However, a section of students were unhappy with the speech especially for certain comments made by the speaker against some venerable personalities. They started shouting against the speaker and attacking him. So to pacify the students and the situation, the petitioner referred to Pansare's book. This did not go down well with the students and they started attacking the petitioner too.

On August 11, the following day, the assistant police officer one RS Garje, of the local police station visited the college and asked the petitioner to apologise for her comments etc and when she did not succumb to his order, he then wrote the impugned letter to the principal to act against the petitioner. Following this, a departmental enquiry was initiated against her.

Appearance:

Advocate Yuvraj Narwankar appeared for the Petitioner.

Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegavkar represented the Police.