Discuss the historical context of lynching and mob violence in India. How does the 2018 judgment reflect the judicial priorities regarding communal harmony?

Question

PocketIAS · Accepted Answer

Introduction

Lynching and mob violence in India are not new phenomena; they have appeared periodically in different historical contexts—ranging from communal riots during Partition to caste-based atrocities and vigilante violence in independent India. In recent years, incidents linked to cow protection, child-lifting rumours, and communal polarisation have revived concerns over rule of law and social cohesion.

Historical Context

Historically, mob violence has often been rooted in communal tensions, caste hierarchies, and socio-economic insecurities. During colonial rule, communal divisions were aggravated by policies of separate electorates and identity-based mobilisation. Post-independence, sporadic communal riots and caste-based violence reflected persistent structural inequalities.

In the contemporary period, the spread of misinformation through social media, identity politics, and vigilantism has contributed to targeted mob attacks, raising concerns about majoritarianism and weakening institutional deterrence.

2018 Supreme Court Judgment and Judicial Priorities

In Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court condemned lynching as a “horrendous act of mobocracy” and affirmed that such violence threatens constitutional values. The Court laid down preventive, remedial, and punitive guidelines, including:

Appointment of nodal officers in districts.
Fast-track trials and victim compensation.
Accountability of police officials for negligence.
Directions to curb hate speech and inflammatory content.

The judgment reflects the judiciary’s priority to uphold rule of law, secularism, and constitutional morality, emphasizing that no citizen can take the law into their own hands.

Conclusion

The 2018 ruling underscores the Court’s commitment to communal harmony and protection of fundamental rights. However, effective implementation and legislative backing remain crucial to translating judicial intent into ground-level change.

✍️ Practice Mode

Write. Evaluate. Improve. Repeat.

The model answer is ready.

Comments (0)