Use of ancient religious text in murder verdict triggers debate on Constitution, judicial neutrality and minority rights
BAHRAICH — The judge who relied on casteist Hindu text in sentencing a Muslim man to death and awarding life term to nine others over last year’s communal riots in the Uttar Pradesh city of Bahraich, has come in for sharp criticism from several quarters. A Congress leader has even called for the dismissal of the judge.
Last week’s ruling also raises serious questions about judicial conduct, constitutional values and the safety of minorities within the legal system.
The case relates to the killing of Ramgopal Mishra during communal violence that broke out in Bahraich on October 13, 2024. According to court records, Mishra was shot dead during clashes that followed a local dispute. Ten people were convicted in the case. Sarfaraz was awarded the death sentence, while nine others were sentenced to life imprisonment.
The 142-page judgment, delivered by District Court Judge Pawan Kumar Sharma on Thursday, became controversial after it emerged that a verse from the Manusmriti was cited while deciding the punishment. The Manusmriti is widely criticised by scholars, Dalit groups and women’s organisations for promoting caste hierarchy and discrimination.
Reacting strongly, Congress National Secretary Shahnawaz Alam demanded the immediate dismissal of the judge and called for intervention by the Supreme Court.
“It is deeply disturbing that a district judge has relied on the Manusmriti while awarding the death sentence,” Alam said. “Such thinking has no place in a constitutional court. A judge who believes in Manusmriti-based justice cannot uphold the Constitution of India.’
He said the presence of such judges in the judiciary was “a danger to the rule of law” and added that action was needed without delay. “The Supreme Court must identify and remove judges who allow ideological bias to enter the courtroom,” he said.
Alam also reminded that Dr B R Ambedkar had publicly burned the Manusmriti as a symbol of protest against caste oppression. “Using the same text to justify punishment today is an insult to Ambedkar’s struggle for equality and justice,” he said.
He pointed out that Indian law already provides clear grounds for awarding the death penalty. “The Indian Penal Code has detailed provisions for murder cases. Courts across the country have given death sentences strictly under these laws. No religious book has ever been the basis for such punishment,” Alam said.
The Congress leader warned that linking punishment to a religious text damages public trust in the judiciary, especially among minorities. “Taking a life through the law is a serious act. Doing so by citing a text rejected by the Constitution turns justice into prejudice,” he said.
Legal observers say the controversy has once again brought focus on the need for strict adherence to constitutional principles, particularly in cases linked to communal violence, where Muslim accused often allege bias and selective treatment.
So far, the district court has not issued any clarification on the use of the Manusmriti in the judgment. The matter is expected to be challenged in higher courts, where the legality of the reasoning and the sentence itself will come under close scrutiny.
