Mariyam Usmani, TwoCircles.net
Ranchi: Sheikh Tajuddin, a local trader from the Saraikela Kharsawan district of Jharkhand, had never imagined that his Muslim appearance and “dadhi (beard) – topi (skull cap) would make him a target for mob violence. On the morning of December 8, the resident of Kapali, Ghousnagar, was allegedly attacked by a group of assailants with rods and batons in Sapara village.
“My abbu (father) often visited Sapara; it’s only six-seven kilometers from our home. Engaged in vegetable and cattle trading, he used to travel between villages,” Tabrez, the deceased’s son, told TwoCircles.net.
Around 10:00 a.m. on December 8, the family received a call informing them of an accident. However, when they arrived at the hospital, they discovered the tragic truth. Tajuddin had not regained consciousness. His three married daughters stayed by his side, tending to him in his final days. During the intense situation, they did not think to address the legal aspects of the case.
Villagers claimed that the attackers accused Tajuddin of animal theft. He was allegedly beaten up black and blue. Once his blood began to flow from his wounds, the mob allegedly dispersed. The 50-year-old was initially taken to Tata Memorial Hospital before being transferred to RIMS in Ranchi, where he succumbed to his injuries on December 13.
‘Political Pressure’
“My abba was a devout Muslim, who offered prayers five times a day and often called the azan (Islamic call to prayer) as the mosque was nearby. He was accused of theft, but he was not that kind of person,” Tabrez said, with his voice choking tears rolling down on his face after his father’s ‘Namaz-e-Janaza’ (funeral prayer) on December 14. The 24-year-old was too overwhelmed with grief to give further details about the situation.
Tajuddin’s nephew, Arshad Ansari, described his uncle as a “noble man” who was easily recognisable as a Muslim. “There was no reason to attack him. He had longstanding ties to the area, and the attackers targeted him in a less crowded location,” he said.
Following the incident, the Adityapur police arrested Mannu Yadav, Chela Yadav, Sanjay Yadav and Gautam Mandal from Sapra village and charged them under sections 126 (2) – wrongful restraint; 115 (2) – voluntarily causing hurt to another person; 117 (2) – intentionally causing grievous hurt; 109 – attempt to commit murder; and 3 (5) – common intention to commit a crime; of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). However, the family believes that more individuals were involved.
Arshad claimed communal tensions are rising in Sapra, with previous incidents of similar violence.
When contact for comments on the incident and allegation leveled, Station House Officer (SHO) Rajiv told TwoCircles.net, “The culprits are in custody, and we are investigating other facts to reach conclusions. Many points need to be scrutinised, and if any additional evidence surfaces, we will take action.”
Relatives of Sheikh Tajuddin stressed on his exemplary character, saying that he had never been involved in any dispute and was always kind to those around him. They believe the accusations of theft were simply a pretext to obscure the true nature of the crime.
“Have you seen the FIR? The perpetrators are trying to use political pressures and links to protect themselves,” said Arshad. He emphasised that Tajuddin was from a respected and educated family and was a modest individual who never harmed anyone.
The family is calling for justice and demanding punishment for the criminals. They have vowed to continue their fight for justice and have sought legal counsel to pursue further action.
Mob Lynching Cases vs Hindutva Safety Net
On December 20, members of the People’s Forum in Jamshedpur held a protest and demanded that Tajuddin’s family be given justice. The protesters urged the government to pass a law against mob lynching in Jharkhand.
“We met the family and neighbors, who explained that many people were involved in the incident. We have a few simple questions: how did the administration identify the culprits so quickly; why did they only register four names when there could have been five or six involved? They could have left some people as ‘unidentified’. It seems like they were trying to close the matter prematurely. According to the law, only a group of five or more people can be classified as a mob,” argued Dilshad Akhtar, a member of the forum.
The People’s Forum has also reached out to the Jharkhand Minority Commission’s Chairperson Hedayatullah Khan and Jharkhand Human Rights Commission’s Chairperson Santosh Kumar Satpathy, but they have not yet responded.
“Why wasn’t the mob lynching law implemented? We will also reach out to the SSP to review the case,” Dilshad added resolutely.
Local Muslims are increasingly concerned about their safety in the area, with alleged rising Islamophobia creating a climate of fear that threatens their ability to live without prejudice or danger.