The Many Mobs Of Nithari

The discovery of the horrific Noida or Nithari killings, followed by therecovery of the bodies of four children from an abandoned mill in Mukhtsar inPunjab in an unrelated case, have dramatically exposed the horror and insecuritythat afflicts the children of the poor. These two cases also illustrate thegross distortions in police, public and media reactions to the discovery of suchcrimes.

It is useful to take the lesser case first. At Mukhtsar, there was nohysteria, no collection of large crowds, no descent, en masse, of attentionseeking 'leaders'. The media was there, but briefings by the localSuperintendent of Police were competent and created no scope for sensationalismand the whipping up of passions. The area was cordoned off till the arrival ofexperts from forensic laboratories, who carried out their technical search forclues. At least one TV channel did try to make an issue of the fact that thebodies were not removed immediately, but common sense suggests that a crimescene is best left untouched till all forensic evidence has been lifted, andbodies at the crime scene reveal evidence of the nature and perpetrator of thecrime to a forensic examiner. Through all this, the SP clearly explained whatthe police was doing. The investigation was evidently carried out quietly andprofessionally; within days, a 'breakthrough' occurred.

The Noida case, by contrast, is a signal example of the worst of possibleresponses. Five different mobs descended on Nithari: the first was the actualmob of ruffians of both sexes who wanted to appear on TV to secure their 15seconds of 'fame'. The second was the mob of reporters and electronic mediateams, full of conjecture, unfounded theorising and outright invention -- insum, totally unprofessional, irresponsible and, on occasion, provocativereportage. At one stage, a journalist from a leading newspaper wrote that 'pieces of humanflesh' were removed from a tandoor in the house -- a claimthat remained un-contradicted for a number of days thereafter. It is impossibleto comprehend how pieces of flesh could be identified as human even before anytests were carried out. Once tested, these were found to be fish and meat.

The third was the mob of politicians. A large number descended on Nithari,accompanied by their armies of toadies and security personnel, shedding littlelight, but adding to the problems of security management in a situation alreadyfraught with tension.

The fourth mob was of various 'experts', including retired policeofficers, psychologists, and random others, totally unafraid of venturing theiropinions on a matter still under investigation, basing their sweeping judgementson media reports which were themselves prejudiced and derived from hearsay andspeculation.

The fifth and most unforgivable mob was the rabble of totally unprofessionalpolicemen. Some of them appeared on TV, not to disclose details of the case orthe status of the investigation, but simply to give vent to their extremeprejudices. One police officer went to the extent of informing the media that"the Sardarji" had also been arrested, a gratuitous reference to the factthat one of the suspects, Moninder Singh Pandher, was a Sikh, a fact utterlyextraneous to the crime or the investigation, and the more unwarranted in viewof the consideration that Pandher wears his hair short and is not immediatelyidentifiable as a Sikh. One cannot imagine a comparable situation where aresponsible police officer would say that 'the Hindu' or 'the Muslim' or 'theChristian' had been arrested. This display of communal prejudice showsthe degree to which police training is deficient, and reveals a deeply bigotedmind, something that would mark a very large number of police officers and men,right across the country. Far from bringing clarity and authority to theinvestigations, a stream of statements and unsubstantiated leaks from police 'sources' fed the prejudices of the multiple mobs at Nithari.

Worse, the police failed to effectively seal the crime scene and to protectcrucial evidence, often leading media groups in trampling over the location.Despite the slow build-up of tensions and crowds, the police was unable to makeadequate arrangements to protect the location, and it was disgraceful to see thesupposedly 'frenzied' mob pelting stones and breaking into the house,visibly egged on by the presence of the media, destroying a substantial portionof evidence that may prove crucial in court.

The horror of the incidents at Nithari cannot be underplayed, and the mediahas a definite role in communicating this horror and in ensuring thatinvestigations are not undermined by corrupt officers and possibly highconnections of the accused. But it cannot be the role of the media to prejudgeand sensationalise the issue. In the present case, the accused were subjected toa frantic 'trial by media', declared guilty and demonised. I am confidentthat, had either Pandher or Surinder Koli fallen into the hands of the 'public' in the early days after the discovery of the crimes, they wouldhave been lynched. Published transcripts of the narco-analysis of the accusednow suggest that Pandher may have been ignorant of the murders. The media mustnot become an extension of Bollywood.

Had the many mobs of Nithari not intervened to such effect, theinvestigations would have been more balanced, quicker and more effective,yielding a rock solid case against the perpetrator(s) of this outrage. Moreimportantly, responsible conduct by the police, media, politicians, 'experts' and public would bring inexorable pressure on the guilty, butwould spare the innocent and their families from the trauma of unfoundeddemonisation.

KPS Gill is former Director General of Police, Punjab and currentlypresident, Institute for Conflict Management. This piece first appeared in theIndian Express.