Six years ago, two families were torn apart by a mob that lynched 45-year-old Mohammed Qasim and grievously injured then 68-year-old Samaydeen. On Tuesday, a Hapur court convicted 10 adults and sentenced them to life in prison. They have also been fined Rs. 58,000 each.
On March 12, Additional District and Sessions Judge Shweta Dixit said Qasim’s killing was “perpetrated by a mob which became rowdy and violent…”. “The crime was heinous in nature and a warning to the entire society at large,” Dixit added.
Samaydeen, the lone survivor of the 2018 Hapur mob lynching and the prime witness for the prosecution, was sitting alone in the lawyer’s chambers when the verdict was pronounced. His advocate Furquan Qureshi had advised him to stay low. “We did not know which way the verdict would go and a crowd of almost 50 people had gathered in the courtroom to support the accused. There was a real concern that the crowd could get violent or rowdy if the judgment did not go their way,” Samaydeen said.
“Five years ago, it was the first roza when I gave my deposition. Yesterday, was the first roza when the judgment was pronounced”, Samaydeen said as he basked in the sun on the charpoy in the courtyard of his house.
Qasim’s family was home when they heard the news. Since Tuesday, they have been fielding calls, receiving extended family members, and media requests for interviews.
The two families, living 10 kilometers apart, could not be any more different from each other. Qasim’s family, he is survived by his wife and children, live in the shadow of a national highway in narrow streets lined with open sewers; while Samaydeen lives with his wife and daughter in a house surrounded by open fields.
Apart from their religion, they have nothing in common. And yet, they were linked by a common incident that changed their lives.
Want to set an example, not seeking revenge
Advocate Furquan Qureshi suggests the March 12 judgment could be the first of its time. “This is perhaps the first time someone has been convicted for murder in a mob lynching case,” Qureshi told BOOM. The Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 does penalize mob lynching unlike the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) where the maximum penalty is capital punishment and comes in effect from July 1.
At present, mob lynching is tried as murder under section 302, IPC, and invites death penalty as the maximum punishment. However, the two families were clear they did not want the court to impose capital punishment.
In June 2023, four years after a 22-year-old Muslim youth Tabrez Ansari died in Jharkhand’s Sarikela-Kharsawan district, a local court convicted 10 people of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and sentenced them to 10 years in prison.
Last year, a local court in Rajasthan’s Alwar district convicted four of the five accused of culpable homicide and wrongful restraint. They got seven years jail time.
“We fought this case, so this doesn’t happen again,” Qasim’s wife Naseema said. “If we had argued for the death penalty, we would be no better than our perpetrators,” Qasim’s brother Salim added.
“Before we set out to fight the case, our advocate Soutik Banerjee counseled us. He said, and I agreed, that if we insist on the death penalty then it would become a case of revenge,” Samaydeen said. “Aur iss case ke zariye, hume ek misaal banana tha,” (We wanted to set an example through this case),” he added.
Thus, the two families jointly appealed to the prosecutor to request the court not to impose the death penalty.
Survivors twin victims of fake news and mob lynching
In 2018, WhatsApp – a social messaging app with more than 535 million active users in India, issued full-page advertisements in leading Indian newspapers warning readers of mob-lynchings and calling on people to combat fake news. Though WhatsApp has been at the center as a tool of misinformation in large markets, it has had far more violent consequences in India.
The advertisments were issued after a series of killings were reported to have been instigated by rumours spread through WhatsApp.
Meta-owned WhatsApp made some changes to their platform. Changes in the app included limiting how many times a message can be forwarded, and a label ‘forwarded many times’ for viral messages.
At the same time, India also saw a spate of cow vigilantism in the aftermath of laws enacted to protect the cow. Qasim, a goat trader by profession, fell victim to a fake rumour which claimed he was slaughtering cows. Samaydeen got caught in the web as he tried to save Qasim – a stranger, from the murderous crowd.
Samaydeen was working at his fodder field near the spot where a mob was brutally assaulting Qasim. “I was cutting fodder when I saw a man being attacked by a mob. Qasim and I were strangers. But I knew him from the market. He used to buy and sell goat calves,” Samaydeen said. “So, when I saw the mob attack him, I tried to intervene and calm things down,” he added.
However, the mob caught Samaydeen and brutally assaulted him as well. He was even forced to “confess” to a crime of cow slaughter on video.
The entire incident went viral not only because of the nature of the crime but also because the video of the forced confession and a photograph showing Qasim being dragged by locals as three police officials stood by and watched also went viral.
The outrage over the photograph prompted the Uttar Pradesh government to issue an apology and transfer the three officials to police lines.
Even the investigation was murky. The police tried to scuttle the case as an incident of road rage over a motorcycle collision. “They (the police) tried to get us to recant the entire incident,” Salim said. “But we always kept our faith in the courts and our lawyer Vrinda Grover,” he added. “Even when the 10 convicts were given bail despite facing a murder charge. It is unheard of,” Salim added.
“All 10 accused got bail before chargesheet was filed because of the FIR noted the crime was a result of a motorcycle accident,” advocate Soutik Banerjee said.
However, Samaydeen filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court. The top court in 2018 ruled that the investigation would be supervised by a senior IPS officer – Meerut’s inspector-general and ordered protection for the two families.
A sting operation done by journalist Saurabh Shukla where the accused bragged – “They killed cows, so I killed them,” proved to be the clincher in the case. The sting video also proved to be instrumental as it was submitted as evidence by the prosecution, Samaydeen said.
In a scathing indictment of UP police, the Hapur court in its March 12 judgment noted four points of police negligence in the case. The police did not even conduct the Test Identification Parade (TIP), one of the many illegalities in their investigation, advocate Soutik Banerjee, who represented the victims, said. The judge noted the same in her verdict as well.
Strangers linked by a crime
In a sense, the victims and the perpetrators were all strangers linked by a crime. “I did not know Qasim personally. I had just seen him around in the market,” Samaydeen said.
Samaydeen said he did not know the perpetrators either. “We all live in nearby villages, so I had seen them around. I recognised and named five of the 10 accused, while I picked out the five others during his deposition in court,” he said.
“In the past six years, while the case was on and even now that the judgment has come, I still see the family members of the 10 accused,” Samaydeen added. Qasim’s family - who sell fruits and vegetables, too keep seeing the family members of their perpetrators.
On being asked what he does when he sees the perpetrators, “What can I do, I simply turn around and walk away,” Samaydeen said. “There is nothing to gain anymore in antagonizing them, is there?” He added.
