Sexual harassment, viral video, and hill town on edge: Inside Shimla’s latest communal flare-up

The two men were dragged out from the shop, roughed up, and paraded through the market till the local police station.

Cross FIRs were lodged. The 22-year-old alleged harasser was arrested, and so were seven people, including two women, who allegedly assaulted his relatives.

The incident has since snowballed into a sensitive case, putting the Congress government in Himachal Pradesh, which came to power in 2022, in a difficult position as it attempts to tread a cautious line in handling such communal flare-ups.

This is not the first time the government has faced such a situation. On September 11, 2024, the town witnessed communal tension when a crowd, including local residents and right-wing organisations, demanded the demolition of a mosque, which was ‘illegally’ extended from one floor to five floors. Police resorted to lathi charge to prevent the mob from reaching the mosque. Following the incident, the mosque committee offered to demolish the unauthorised portions of the structure themselves.

In the current case, videos showing the two men being dragged through the market amid anti-religious sloganeering went viral on social media, heightening concerns over communal polarisation.

The latest case

According to police, the girl filed a written complaint on June 5, alleging the accused made a video and allegedly blackmailed her.

Police registered a case and initiated an investigation. The victim’s statement was subsequently recorded before a magistrate and police added sections of the POCSO Act to the case.

The complaint regarding the parading incident was filed by the tailor. He alleged that a group arrived with the minor girl and asked if she knew him. She said she did not recognise them but the group still assaulted him and his colleague, the complaint claimed.

The complainant further alleged that they were dragged out of the shop, beaten and publicly paraded through the market while slogans were raised against them.

The police registered a FIR for trespass, voluntarily causing hurt, criminal intimidation, rioting, unlawful assembly, vandalism and promoting enmity between different groups.

What makes this case sensitive for the Shimla Police is the fact that two of the six suspects from the right-wing group have multiple cases involving allegations of promoting enmity between communities.

Shimla Additional Superintendent of Police Abhishek told The Indian Express that two suspects, aged 43 and 47, who allegedly paraded the men, have a long criminal history. “The most recent incident was their attempt to disturb the wedding reception of the daughter of a man from a minority community, which was being held at a dharamshala belonging to a Sanatan social-religious institute — with the management’s permission — on April 11. We had arrested them under preventive measures the same day and the event proceeded without further disturbance.”

The BJP’s minority cell chief distanced the party from the issue and criticised the men for calling the protest. The management of the Dharamshala also did not pay heed to the protest call and went ahead with the event.

People sitting on protest outside the Sanjauli police station. (Special Arrangement)

According to him, six suspects, including the two women, were later released on bail on Wednesday. A local court in Shimla imposed strict conditions, warning that bail will be cancelled if they are found disturbing public peace again.

One of the main accused, a 43-year-old Shimla resident, is involved in farming and had earlier run a water purification plant that shut down two years ago. He has been named in seven previous cases.

Another accused, aged 47, is based in the town and owns agricultural land and rental property. Police said he faces around 10 criminal cases, many linked to rioting, disturbing public peace, promoting enmity between different communities, and disruption of communal harmony.

The remaining four accused are Shimla residents. One more suspect, aged 36, was arrested later.

Counter claims

The protesters, however, had a different story to tell. A man, who was part of the protest, claimed, “There is no need to give this incident a communal colour. We only led a protest when police failed to act and delayed the arrest of suspect (s) involved in the crime. The main suspect was only arrested when we held a protest and ‘questioned’ some of his family members on June 6. Moreover, the victim has recorded a fresh police statement maintaining that the two men who were ‘questioned’ were also involved in the crime.”

On June 7, over a hundred people, including the victim and her family, staged a protest outside the local police station demanding action against the two men from the tailoring shop, alleging their involvement in the case as well. They also demanded the immediate release of the six people.

Police sources said the investigation became more complicated after the victim’s subsequent statements reportedly differed from her initial version.

Additional SP Abhishek confirmed this. “The first complaint of the victim and her statement before a local magistrate did not mention the name of any other suspects, except one. The victim has now recorded a fresh statement, claiming that two other people were also involved in the crime. It is under scrutiny and being probed on the basis of available evidence,” he said.

The Additional SP also said, “The two distant relatives of the main suspect were neither named in the victim’s complaint or statement before a local magistrate. Even when the mob had barged into the tailoring shop, the victim reportedly said the two men were not involved in the crime. Yet, the men were assaulted.”

When contacted, the victim’s family did not respond.

The defence counsel for the accused — the two men aged 43 and 47 and the two women — said they are innocent and that the court granted bail after considering their submissions.

“My clients have not been convicted in a single case; they are all under trial,” Advocate Hemant Vaid said. the lawyer said. He said this was the first time he was representing them.

The court of Judicial Magistrate First Class Sushmita Sharma, in the June 9 order, mandated four conditions while granting bail. “They (suspects) shall make themselves available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required, and regularly attend the trial… on each and every date of hearing.”

It said if they can’t, they must seek exemption from appearance by filing an appropriate application.

“The suspects shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused in the present case during the period of bail. Suspects shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of India without prior permission of the court… suspects shall furnish personal bonds in the sum of Rs 1,00,000/- each with one surety in the like amount.”

Party speak

To be sure, the state has witnessed at least 21 communally charged protests between September 11 and December 31, 2024, demanding the demolition of allegedly unauthorised mosques.

Authorities registered 12 FIRs and arrested 97 individuals in connection with the protests, according to multiple responses to a Right to Information (RTI) request filed by The Indian Express.

On how the Congress is dealing with such cases, Shimla Congress MLA Harish Janartha said the government’s stand on such vigilante and communal acts is very clear: No tolerance.

“This time also, we adopted strict measures and the police lodged an FIR without any delay. The people involved in the parading of the men were all anti-social elements. Many of them have criminal backgrounds. Indeed, it has become a pattern in this particular area of the town to give every incident a communal colour.”

He added, “There is no doubt that politics is involved in such acts. Though no political party has supported such acts so far, the individuals involved in such things always tried to derive political mileage out of such acts.”

A Congress leader, speaking on condition of anonymity, told The Indian Express that two of the suspects — both women — in the June 6 incident were allegedly linked to the BJP, which has not issued any statement on the matter so far. “Our government does not tolerate such incidents. In every such case, the police have registered FIRs and arrested the suspects. In this particular case, seven people were arrested, based on the evidence available,” the leader said.

The BJP, however, has distanced itself from the case.

Condemning the parading incident, BJP Minority Cell state president Gurmeet Singh said, “… There is no registered organisation named Hindu Sangarsh Samiti in the state. There are two-three individuals, who are in the habit of taking law and order into their hands. We also condemned them when they protested over a dharamshala allowing the reception of a woman from the minority community there.”

“We should also see how certain elements took advantage of the situation. In many such cases, people exploit police apathy or delay in action. But that does not mean people should become the police. In such situations, they should approach senior officers instead of taking to the streets and indulging in lawlessness,” he added.

The incident has further highlighted the challenges faced by law-enforcement agencies when criminal investigations become entangled with social tensions and public mobilisation.

Urging citizens not to take the law into their own hands and to allow investigations to proceed through legal channels, a police spokesperson said, “Violence, vandalism, public humiliation and attempts to influence an ongoing investigation cannot be justified under any circumstances. Any complaint or information should be brought before the police through lawful means. Action will be taken impartially against every individual found violating the law, irrespective of identity, community or affiliation.”