Author – Kabir Dev

New York Times journalist Ellen Barry’s insightful and revelatory piece titled “How to Get Away with Murder in Small Town India” acts as an eye-opener for primarily a western audience that has been accustomed to often surface-level reporting regarding India which has consisted of either extreme romanticisation with regards to idyllic villages, cows, awestruck civilians to one of complete derision and scorn regarding a third world country full with snake charmers, poverty, unhygienic living conditions among various other demeaning attributes. However, this particular paper extremely intricately examines the workings and demeanour of Indian villages through the lens of a murder that has taken place in the village. 

The setting is of Peepli Khera a small village in the most populous state of India Uttar Pradesh. Barry culminated his trip to India with an interview with Jahiruddin Mewati, the village chief who despite being uneducated was a shrewd politician who was cherishing his victory in the local elections held recently. Although the post he held was reserved for lower caste women no one in the village seemed to have any qualms about this facade since women’s representation in elected bodies have ceased to be anything more than token in India. Even though his wife’s name appeared on the ballot, still the face on all posters was his(Barry, 2020). His overall role simply was transactional driven by purely political gains with regards to familial and caste equations. Although he had undertaken considerable commendable work also in the sphere of improving the quality of life for several poor labourers by advocating for women to work as day labourers which had led to the rising incomes of several day labourers(Barry, 2020). The new subsidy which provided women with gas stoves acted as a boon for several people and was heralded as something exceptionally groundbreaking and revolutionary which transformed the way of life for a significant set of underprivileged people in villages. 

Subsequently, the journalist moves on to the main segment of her piece, which was to do with a murder. Barry disseminates the information by segregating it according to days; hence she begins with the first day, which was a Thursday. She first hears the rumour of murder wherein a woman who had been killed a year back, bludgeoned to death by her husband in front of at least a dozen people. According to the witness who was relaying this information to Barry even though the police initially arrested the husband, he was eventually let off. Absurdly the same husband, Mukesh got married again the very day after he had killed his first wife. Mukesh’s brother justified the murder by stating that Mukesh had caught his wife Geeta cheating on him and killed her out of rage. Barry eventually goes and questions the local constable who shrugs off claims off police complacency regarding Geeta’s murder and completely discounts Mukesh’s apparent role in the murder of Geeta. However, he ends the conversation with a discerning remark about foreign journalists such as Barry and the impact they have on India’s global image. He castigates Barry by saying that owing to the increasingly biased and patronising coverage of India done in the past Barry will not be any less wherein comments will be misconstrued, and conjectures will be made which will eventually result in reportage that is far from the truth and would end in the diminishing of India’s image worldwide. Commendably the writer acknowledges these very limitations and drawbacks of foreign journalists who have consistently demeaned India and several other countries by writing increasingly biased and agenda-driven reports on the whole. The next day on Friday Barry goes to interview Mukesh but initially interviews the new wife. However, Barry also points out discerningly the inherent power dynamics at play wherein new wife’s occupy arguably the lowest rung in family hierarchy this was evident in the manner in which the woman sat on the floor in a stupendously subservient manner. In contrast, the journalist sat on a cot(Barry, 2020). 

Eventually, Barry interviews Mukesh and his new wife through the course of which several startling insights came to light. Upon asking whether Mukesh killed his ex-wife Geeta he unapologetically states that yes he did and manages to explain in detail how exactly he did it. While his new wife remorselessly stated that she deserved to be killed. However, the new wife seemed queasy about one particular aspect of her otherwise blissful existence with Mukesh that she would now have to respond to the name Geeta(Barry, 2020). The next day Barry confronts the same constable with video evidence of Mukesh confessing to Geeta’s murder however he in an extremely dejected manner states that Mukesh’s family bribed senior police officials and also with the help of village chief Jahiruddin Mewati the murder charge did not stick, and everybody’s silence was bought. With this new piece of information Barry on the very next day goes and confronts the village headman who again like Mukesh had no qualms about his complicity wherein, he states that owing to Mukesh’s extend family votes which amounted to around 150 votes he can easily win elections that are eventually decided in the end with a margin of merely 90 odd votes like his previous election victory was(Barry, 2020). He then goes on a monologue about the nature of Indian politics which is rooted in caste and community politics hence it was imperative for him to pander to a massive community like Mukesh’s family who was afraid that Mukesh’s murder case would bring shame to their caste on the whole. Barry remarks that unlike the European legal system with its constant emphasis on individual rights had to compromise with regards to India, wherein there is a preference to group rights rather than individual rights. Barry ends her piece with a description of her visit to Geeta’s mother’s residence wherein even Geeta’s son is present who states dejectedly that his father never loved his mother while his grandmother looks on and hopefully states that hope he can take revenge once he grows up(Barry, 2020).

This particular new york times piece regardless of the particular agenda it wants to set with regards to India in an extremely malicious and myopic sense has much truth in it which has been an unfortunate reality of our great country. With regards to Indian politics, this reflects a more extensive and a much deeper malaise wherein vote bank politics has taken precedence over actual concrete promises and debates over development and reform. A country of exemplary statesmen like Pt.Nehru and Dr B.R. Ambedkar who advocated for social reform, moulding and maintaining a scientific temper among various other things. Ironically both these great men had castigated villages, particularly in response to Mahatma Gandhi’s patronising claim regarding villages wherein he romanticised village life and advocated giving more power to villages by decentralising power. He advocated for the kind of set up and way of life prevalent in villages. While both Nehru and Ambedkar called him out for this and castigated his position on villages owing to the fact that according to them the very rot of Indian society to do with cattiest, atavistic and regressive tendencies lay at the very fulcrum of these villages which needed to be stemmed at the very root in order for India to develop(Gandhi, Nehru and Ambedkar: Three Formulations of ‘Real India’, 2020). However, India has come a long way no doubt over the past 70 odd years since independence. However, the ills of village life have not been tackled head-on owing to political complacency and fears arising out of vote bank politics and on the whole insecurities of losing elections and ultimately power. These are times when convicted rapists like Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, Kuldeep Singh Sengar are patronised out of fear of upsetting the communities they represent and the kind of following they have in their respective areas. Right before the Haryana elections in 2019 Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh a convicted godman parole plea was supported by the BJP in order to gain patronage among his humongous following in Haryana for the upcoming elections(Dera chief’s bail plea in HC tomorrow, timing linked to Haryana voting, 2020). While the BJP again hesitated in shunning and calling out Sengar’s conduct in Unnao owing to his regional plight and influence in the area. These incidents reflect what is wrong with Indian politics on the whole, primarily since the 1990s after the Mandal commissions recommendations were implemented by the VP Singh government caste politics have exacerbated multifold. Every move in the limelight is taken considering different caste and community machinations and calculations which end up hampering and filtering the positive ramifications if any of any such policy move, etc. As evidenced in the New York Times article that by siding with a dominant majority caste you can literally get away with murder here in India, the broader picture is not really different with the gruesome murders of rationalists like Govind Pansare and Narendra Dabholkar as well as journalist Gauri Lankesh till date owing to a lacklustre investigation the culprits were arrested after a considerable delay owing to the fact that these were politically motivated murders purportedly done by members of Hindu right-wing organisations. Similarly, with regards to the spate of lynchings all across the country with minorities facing the brunt of these hate crimes, there has been consistent evidence to prove that there was state patronage as well as complicity in several instances. When the social ills prevalent in a particular community can be overlooked owing to vote bank machinations and calculations vis a vis Sabarimala as well as among various other instances it can be comprehensively extrapolated that it is a deplorable state of politics in the country. 

Moving on to the second glaring aspect that can succinctly sum up what ails the Indian political system along with caste and communal fault lines is that of gender and patriarchal paternalism. Arguably India’s most famous mythological epic is the Ramayana wherein Lord Ram made his wife Sita go through a trial by fire to prove her chastity and fidelity after being abducted by Ravana and being forcefully confined in his kingdom. The same Lord Ram is revered all across the country by a majority in the Hindu community which comprises a majority in India itself. Since ages women have been considered the property of men in the course of not just marriage but also in families itself; hence the very fact that there was a doubt on the fidelity of Geeta can warrant and even justify her gruesome murder reflects the mindset of several Indian men not just in villages but even in urban spaces(Krishnan, 2020). Several politicians over the years have made shocking remarks regarding women which range from victim shaming to she was asking for it owing to specific attributes among various other distasteful remarks about rape, etc (10 sexist slurs that show how ridiculous Indian politicians can be, 2020). Along with the fact that any sort of reform that is initiated even from the uppermost echelons of power in India is met with scorn and is not implemented on the ground properly as is evident in the case of the village chief’s position being reserved for women but unfortunately being for women solely on paper with the women merely being used as a token symbol of representation and ultimately her husband as was the case with Jahiruddin Mewati appropriating and exploiting the position of village chief which was rightfully his wife’s. 

Caste, communal and gender act as integral factors which end up hampering the reform and progress of Indian polity on the whole. As Nehru and Ambedkar stated that until and unless the Indian village is not reformed and purged of its atavistic and regressive practices and tendencies, India will not be able to progress on the whole(Gandhi, Nehru and Ambedkar: Three Formulations of ‘Real India’, 2020). Although, owing to various compulsions regarding the insecurity and paranoia of upsetting the status quo to do with the dominant caste’s and players involved in the day to day affairs in villages, Indian society with regards to villages has comprehensively been unable to develop and progress in the socio-political sphere(Dev, 2020). Several vested and malicious designs to do with backwardness and regressive practices prevalent in villages have consistently over the years tried their best to uphold and preserve the same archaic customs and notions which has led to India continuing to remain the same den of superstition, casteism, discrimination among various other social evils. 

References 

India Today. 2020. 10 Sexist Slurs That Show How Ridiculous Indian Politicians Can Be. [online] Available at: <https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/sexist-indian-politician-comments-330406-2016-07-20> [Accessed 21 March 2020].

Barry, E., 2020. How To Get Away With Murder In Small-Town India. [online] Nytimes.com. Available at: <https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/19/world/asia/murder-small-town-india.html> [Accessed 21 March 2020].

The Week. 2020. Dera Chief’s Bail Plea In HC Tomorrow, Timing Linked To Haryana Voting. [online] Available at: <https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2019/04/30/dera-chief-bail-plea-in-hc-tomorrow-timing-linked-to-haryana-voting.html> [Accessed 21 March 2020].

Dev, K., 2020. Urbanisation in a Delhi village: Some Social Aspects.

Economic and Political Weekly. 2020. Gandhi, Nehru And Ambedkar: Three Formulations Of ‘Real India’. [online] Available at: <https://www.epw.in/engage/article/gandhi-nehru-and-ambedkar-three-formulations-real> [Accessed 21 March 2020].

Krishnan, K., 2020. Fearless Freedoms.