A relatively ambiguous crime

Rao’s conviction in the JMM case rather than for other more widely recognised crimes is thus a commentary on the quality of the rule of law prevalent in India. Take the kind of allegations made against Rao before the judicial inquiry that started this week into the 1984 massacre of Sikhs in Delhi. The inquiry is in fact being held for the second time because the earlier probe was held by a Supreme Court judge who, after covering up the complicity of Congress leaders in the carnage, became an MP on that party’s ticket. Rao was the home minister when, as per the official toll, 2,733 Sikhs were massacred in a span of three days in the Capital following the assassination of Indira Gandhi. It was the biggest carnage since the Partition riots.

As home minister administering the then Union territory of Delhi, Rao was directly responsible for the inaction of the police and the delay in the deployment of the army. But Rao did not assume any responsibility, moral or otherwise, and he carried on as a member of the Rajiv Gandhi cabinet. He got away with that lapse because the Ranganath Misra Commission anyway exonerated the Rajiv Gandhi government. Eminent persons such as art historian Patwant Singh and Bangladesh war hero J.S. Aurora have since filed affidavits before the recently appointed G.T. Nanavati Commission recalling the indifference displayed by Rao when they met him during the riots. As Patwant put it in his affidavit filed last month, Rao "was looking impassive and seemingly without a care. The atmosphere at the Home Minister’s house did not show at all that there was any crisis."

Eight years later, when he was Prime Minister, Rao was widely accused of similar inaction around the time of the Babri Masjid demolition. In his memoirs, the then home secretary, Madhav Godbole, vividly brought out Rao’s complicity in the events leading to the demolition and the communal violence that followed in many parts of the country. Rao was blamed not only by the Opposition leaders but also by his own party leaders like Arjun Singh. But again, Rao carried on with impunity because the criminal case registered over the demolition did not name him among the accused politicians. The conspiracy alleged by the CBI is largely confined to members of the Sangh Parivar while the help rendered to them by Rao with his acts of omission and commission has remained uninvestigated. This aspect has not been touched even by the M.S. Liberhan Commission, which is still dragging on with its inquiry proceedings.

Rao has also had a lucky run with the cases in which he was actually arraigned as an accused. In the St Kitts case, the court discharged him of the allegation of having been involved in an attempt to frame V.P. Singh with forged documents. In the Lakhubhai Pathak case, the complainant passed away while the case is still pending. The CBI appealed in the Supreme Court against his discharge in the St Kitts case and is optimistic that the complainant’s death will not affect the other case because Pathak had already been examined by the court. As things stand, Rao has been convicted in a debatable case while the more serious allegations have gone abegging.Rao has got away with charges more serious than the one in the JMM case