Shruti Ganpatye, author of Who Will Bell the Cow, spoke to Liberation about the rapid spread and destructive effects of cow vigilante violence.
Why do you think there is a steep rise in cow vigilante violence in the last few years? Is it an entirely new phenomenon?
Shruti Ganpatye: Gau Rakshaks or cow vigilante is not a new phenomenon. They have a history of 150 years, but the phenomenon remained mostly limited to the northern and the western parts of the country. It is since the BJP government came to power in 2014 in the Centre and since then other states, the violence in name of cow protection intensified.
In 1875, Dayanand Saraswati started the Arya Samaj movement which included Gau Raksha as one of the agendas. Hindus had opposed the killing of cows by the British soldiers, but this was not against Muslims. However, the whole movement slowly turned against Muslims, as the butchers belonged to minority community.
In pre-independence India, the brutality of Gau Rakshaks and communal violence associated with cow protection spread from northern regions up to the western part of the country. It affected a city like Mumbai, which too witnessed riots over cows that were termed as worst riots ever by the British. The first Bombay Gaurakshak Mandali group was set up in Bombay in 1887 by Parsi mill owner Dinshaw Petit; Gaupalan Updeshak Mandali founded in 1893 by a Bhatia Mill owner Lakhmidas Khimjee. Noisy demonstrations, violent speeches and warlike songs were the routine activities of the Mandali.
Gau Krishiya Dhirkshini or Gau Rakshini Sabhas were set up around 1880 in Punjab and Uttar Pradesh. A door-to-door campaign, rescuing cows from butchers, raising funds to build gaushala and imposing a fine on Hindus for selling their cows to a butcher were some of the techniques used to create social pressure for cow protection. In 1881, riots broke out in Multan over the sale of beef leading to tensions in Delhi, Hoshiarpur, and areas near Lahore.
On November 7, 1966, a rally was organised in Delhi by Hindutva leaders to demand cow protection. Golwalkar, Karpatri Maharaj, Prabhudatt Brahmachari, Congress leader Seth Govind Das, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Hanuman Poddar were the main leaders of the rally. The rally started marching towards the Parliament causing destruction along the way, in which eight people died.
It is interesting to know that lots of literature and artwork was created around the cow protection movement in the Hindi language. It created an impact among the masses and made them sympathetic towards cows. For example, A newspaper, Gausewak, was regularly published at Banaras in the 1890s. Bihari intelligentsia had strong opinions about the cow protection movement in the early 1880s. Their view is reflected in a book, Goraksha, published in 1884 with economic explanations of cow protection. Bharat Mitra published an advertisement in 1881 offering prizes of Rs 5 to Rs 25 for composing poems in support of cows. Hindi Pradip quoted Ramayana in support of cow protection. The earliest book on cow protection was Go Dharma Sar written by the head of the Haridwar Go Rakshini Sabha, Mohan Lal, and published in Prayag in 1886. These are just a few early examples.
“Gau-raksha” or “cow-vigilantism” - what do you make of these categories?
SG: I do not see any difference between Gau Rakshak and Cow Vigilante. However, there are two categories: those who adhere to direct violence in the name of cows and those who do not get involved in violence directly but preach the same ideology. The first category is into vigilante work, monitoring Muslim households, having connections with police and local government officials who help them, holding raids, threatening farmers, seizing cattle, etc. The second, act in a supporting role by promoting the “cow economy” and call themselves “Gau Sevak”. By the word “cow economy”, I mean those who try to sell everything from cow urine to dung, claiming medicinal benefits and boasting sustainable ways by keeping old cattle and having Gaushalas. They have soft and polite ways and easy to get access to every household in the vicinity. They look harmless but are equally dangerous. Both work for the same ultimate goal.
How do you look at the laws around Cow protection and intensifying cow vigilante violence?
SG: The root cause of violence lies in Article 48 of the directive principle of the Constitution. The fact that first Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, always opposed a blanket ban on cow slaughter, is important, and that he also offered his resignation against making any such provision in the Constitution. The issue reflected in Article 48 of the directive principle of the Constitution says, “The State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.” Even Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar had opposed the ban, and the section was included as a guiding principle.
The various state laws which came later were drafted based on the Constitution’s Article 48. The wording “prohibition of cow slaughter” has been considered while drafting the laws. But “organised agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines” has not been considered at all. Modern and scientific techniques include breeding healthy cattle and culling the useless old ones. This is the practice all over the world. But the states conveniently drew its meaning from the Article and pressed for a complete ban on cow slaughter. There is an urgent need to amend Article 48 by removing its ambiguity. But it would probably prove seditious to even make such a demand in the present circumstances.
Many state legislations have increased the fine and punishment in cow protection cases based on just the perception of cow killing. Haryana’s Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act of 2015 has a total ban on all slaughter of cows and progeny and has punishment of imprisonment from 3 to 10 years and a fine of Rs 30,000 to one lakh. It is again a non-bailable offence, and the burden of proof lies on the accused, which is insane. Also, the Haryana Act has permitted “any person” to search properties for suspicion of beef/cow slaughter and seize a vehicle for the same reason. A similar provision has been made in the Maharashtra Act. In the Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act of 1955, amended in 2020, has increased imprisonment for cow slaughter, beef sale and transport to 10 years and a fine of Rs 5 lakh. For the second conviction, the punishment recommended is double.
Gujarat’s Animal Preservation Act 1954, which banned the slaughter of cows, calves, bulls and bullocks was amended in 2017 introducing stricter punishment like life imprisonment and fine up to Rs 10 lakh. Also, possession of beef can get 10 years of imprisonment.
In the present era, the governments are not doing anything to prevent violence. In so many lynching cases, vigilantes have not been punished. In fact, in many cases, it is the victims who are charged with cattle smuggling.
Does the increase in this violence reflect an administrative weakness? If yes, what needs to change?
SG: In many cases of violence, there is a definite delay in registering cases and there is no way to find out if the seized meat is sent to a forensic laboratory check; in many places, such forensic laboratories do not exist. The data related to violence is either not registered or shared publicly. There is no transparency in the violence cases. I tried to find out as much data as I could about the violence from 11 states by filling 90 queries under the Right to Information Act. However, only Haryana and Jharkhand replied to all the questions. I was denied information, citing “National Security” as a reason.
Is social media playing a specific role in this phenomenon?
SG: Definitely. Social media is the easiest tool to disseminate information. One can find abundant material on social media regarding the cow protection movement. There are dedicated pages, groups, videos, photos, posts and many messages inciting people and spreading rumours and misinformation. Gau Rakshaks have their Whats App groups to share information, connect with other groups from neighbouring districts and have a constant dialogue regarding the movement.
With the intensifying cow vigilante violence, how do you look into the issue?
SG: The question is after so much lynching in the last 10 years and so much violence what is the opposition waiting for to take it up as a political issue? We did not see any counter-movement to cow protection in the last 10 years. The onus cannot be put on the citizens alone when the entire political system is supporting cow protection. The fear created among the people is so terrifying that no one wants to take up the issue. Food has become a major issue in the present context. A beef ban is one thing but eating anything non-vegetarian is considered a crime. Even children and schools are not spared from the food controversies. Eggs have been barred from Mid-Day Meal Schemes, non-vegetarian persons are not allowed in residential societies, students are questions from bringing non-vegetarian food in tiffins, there is clear segregation in the society based on food, “Ours” Vs “Theirs”. Unless the fear is reduced by punishing the vigilantes, the people cannot come out openly to speak.
