The Imrana case, which has plunged the Muslim community into turmoil, throws up several issues. First is the question where rape is a crime or not. Or is it to be viewed only as an act of sex forced upon a woman? An act that defiles and dishonours the victim, and not the perpetrator of the crime?There is outrage about the verdict of the village council which ruled that Imrana, a young mother of five who was allegedly raped by her father-in-law, had become haram for her husband, and could no longer live with him. The caste panchayat went on to suggest that she could live with her father-in-law as his wife and treat her present husband as her son.But why blame just the Muslim community alone? How is the village council’s verdict any different from the offer made to rape victims by the courts in Delhi and Mumbai not so long ago? The courts had offered marriage to the rapist as an option for the women who had been raped.It is ironical that all this should happen at a time when a law is being formulated to deal with violence within the home. Last week the Cabinet approved the draft bill against domestic violence which promises to penalise not just physical violence, but also verbal and emotional abuse. And, yet, we have this extraordinary spectacle of marriage to the rapist being offered as a solution for rape. Would the courts offer marriage as a solution to other violence perpetrated against a woman? Suppose a man were to throw acid on a girl’s face and disfigure it, should an offer of marriage from him pass for justice?At least the clerics in the Darul Uloom in Deoband, who had pronounced on the case, are now backtracking under pressure — they did not offer Imrana marriage to her rapist father-in-law, they now claim, although they still endorse the view that she could not continue to live with her husband.Rape is a terrible violence against a woman but it is also a crime against the state. Now the issue has gone beyond haram, into the realm of crime and punishment. Imrana made a serious allegation of rape, and if it is found to be a false allegation for reasons of property, which is being alleged now by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, then she should be taken to task. These are issues of law and justice, and must remain in that sphere.The social implications of this are mind-boggling. Anyone can now rape a woman, offer marriage and get away with the crime. This is a veritable Pandora’s box waiting to be opened. Particularly as female foeticide is on the increase and the sex ratio is getting more and more skewed. Families may now increasingly confine their daughters to the home in order to protect them and to keep them “safe”. We are looking at a scenario which could adversely affect women’s freedom and their right to take decisions.The tragic aspect of all this is that while the rape victim is traumatised, stigmatised, ostracised, defiled and considered “easy game”, she is also penalised for being the victim. This is evident in Imrana’s case. It was also true in the case of the young Delhi University student from the Northeast who, it was said, must have have invited the rape. The woman-victim’s views, and the issues pertaining to her like her rehabilitation and welfare, are given the least importance.Last year there was the case of Gudiya. She wanted to stay with her husband whose child she was carrying. But the clergy ruled that she go back to her first husband, who she thought was dead. She chose to go back to her first husband. And now Imrana is faced with a similar dilemma.It is understandable that Imrana and Gudiya should opt to do whatever the clerics ruled. No matter how painful that decision, flouting the clergy’s edict in the social milieu prevailing at the moment would entail greater social isolation. Both Gudiya and Imrana felt that it would compound their problems. Therein lies the tragedy of the situation.The response of political parties to this issue reveals their bankruptcy. Hoping for a throwback to the early nineties, Mulayam Singh Yadav and the BJP would like to polarise the situation to their advantage. The Congress, as usual, is neither here nor there. The snowballing controversy appears to have all the makings of another Shah Bano case, which had divided the polity along religious lines and contributed to the overthrow of the Congress in 1989.But there is one difference this time round: there is a greater churning within the Muslim community, with women and scholars speaking out more forcefully than they did at the time of the Shah Bano controversy. They are questioning the basis on which the edicts were issued. There is also a consciousness that regressive stances would mean playing into the hands of Hindu fundamentalists.The Imrana story is far from over. How it unfolds will reveal a great deal about the future trajectory of Indian politics and society.
