THERE are times when even the most die-hard defender of Indian democracy despairs. Our claims as a law-governed, constitutional state took a serious knock with the brutal attack on S.A.R. Geelani, a key accused in the Parliament attack case. Geelani was en route to meeting his lawyer, Nandita Haksar, when he was shot and grievously wounded. It is unclear at the time of writing who shot Geelani, and the consequent trading of charges and counter-charges have done little to clear the air and reduce the disquiet. For central to the ongoing saga is the role of the Delhi Police.

Within days of the attack on Parliament, S.A.R. Geelani and a few others were arrested, charged with being involved in a terrorist conspiracy and waging war against the state. The rapidity with which the Delhi Police, in particular the Special Branch in charge of anti-terrorist operations, claimed to have cracked the case was intriguing. But despite the many questions and doubts raised by the team of defence lawyers and the public campaign by the human rights fraternity, a special court deemed fit to sentence Geelani and many of the co-accused to death.

This judgement was, however, on appeal overturned by the Delhi High Court. Though the court confirmed the sentence on some of the accused, Geelani himself was declared innocent. More significant were the court strictures on the conduct of the investigation, charging the Delhi Police with shoddy and unprofessional conduct, unnecessarily subjecting an innocent man to severe tribulations.

Not unexpectedly, the police challenged the verdict and the case is now in the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, the judgement of the High Court was seen as a significant victory for human rights and the rule of law, that justice though delayed is not denied. After nearly two years in prison, S.A.R. Geelani walked free, able once again to resume his work as a teacher in Delhi University. Any expectation that Geelani and his family would be able to live in peace was, however, not to be.

For the last one year Geelani and his family have remained under continuous scrutiny, followed and harassed. More than once, he has expressed concern about his safety. And now, with this attack, his worst fears have come true.

So who attacked Geelani? One likely candidate is the Special Branch of the Delhi Police. Already under scrutiny for their shoddy investigation and framing evidence to buttress their case, their modus operandi and reputation is under a cloud. Had they picked on Geelani just because he is a Kashmiri Muslim, somewhat outspoken about the state of democracy in the disturbed province? Or was it because of his familiarity with the other accused who, though admitting to their role in the attack on Parliament, steadfastly maintained that Geelani was uninvolved.

There is little doubt that the audacious attack on the Parliament shook the little confidence we have in our security apparatus. There was extreme pressure on the police to solve the case, and fast. Possibly this may explain why the police took to short-cuts, over-reading and fabricating evidence to claim a speedy and successful investigation. The two articles by Geelani’s lawyer (Seminar 521, January 2003 and 533, January 2004) detailing the case and the trial make for a depressing, though instructive reading. Above all, they demonstrate the ease with which nationalist opinion can be swayed in such situations and why it is incumbent on all of us, if we believe in the rule of law and the principle of fair trial, to scrupulously assess evidence and not jump to hasty conclusions.

If the police is, as Geelani’s lawyer and many in the human rights fraternity believe, involved in the attempt on Geelani’s life, we are in for difficult times. In many parts of the country – Kashmir, the Northeast, Naxalite affected Andhra Pradesh, lawless Bihar – the police and security forces are widely believed to be not just violators of human rights but often operating as a state within a state and indulging in ‘false’ encounters, agencies pursuing personalised agendas. But once the same malaise afflicts the national capital, can we continue to retain faith in the professionalism and impartiality of our law and order machinery?

Is it that one is making too much of this one incident? Possibly, though the record of our security agencies, including in Delhi, does give cause for concern. The frequency with which ‘innocents’ are charged, sometimes even convicted only to be let off later is alarming. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has demanded an impartial and speedy enquiry into the Geelani case. Let us hope that our authorities will not stand on false pride and indulge in a cover-up and shoddy muck-raking. At stake is the fair name of our Republic.

Harsh Sethi