This year began with the news of the death of a 5-year-old boy, who was allegedly forcibly dipped in the chilly river Ganga at Haridwar in the height of winter by his family in the belief that the river would cure him of cancer. The family was so convinced this would work that they even prevented bystanders from trying to help the boy.
Superstitions, human sacrifice, black magic and so-called healing practices are often hidden under the garb of religion and ancient culture. It is precisely because of the ambiguity between faith and blind faith that an attack on superstitions is often seen as an attack on religion. The passage of the Assam Healing (Prevention of Evil) Practices Bill, 2024, earlier this week has once again highlighted issues of legal solutions for social evils.
Presently, there exists no central legislation to deal with superstitions, black magic etc. There is only the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisement) Act, 1954. Thus, there are state laws to tackle the menace of superstitions.
The first few laws to tackle superstition were with regard to the practice of witch-hunting and were passed by Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha and Chhattisgarh. The legislation aimed to put an end to the brutal killing and maiming of women termed as witches.
The killings of rationalists Narendra Dabholkar and M. M. Kalburgi in Pune in 2013 and Dharwad in 2015, respectively, for questioning superstitious and unscientific practices led to the passage of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013 and the Karnataka Prevention and Eradication of Inhuman Evil Practices and Black Magic Act, 2017.
Blind faith and superstitions galvanise the legal machinery in the event of death or bodily injury, or when people are lured to spend money for miracle cures. Here is a look at some cases before the courts.
In Jitu Murmu v. State of Orissa, the Orissa high court was hearing the bail application of a ‘self-styled supernational medicine expert’. The brief facts were that the victim was ill for a few days and was brought to the house of the petitioner to be healed. The petitioner, claiming that an evil spirit had taken over the body of the victim and ridding her of the spirit would cure her, then allegedly proceeded to use a trident and maimed the body of the victim leading to her death. The victim had sustained 27 injuries. One of the submissions raised was that witnesses had not supported the case of the prosecution. The court rejected this claim by citing that the petitioner’s claim to be a “witch doctor” was capable of instilling fear in the minds of witnesses. The court noted that “The communities living there are usually close-knit societies and persons who claim to possess such supernatural powers and dabble in the practice of occult are usually feared in such communities… If the witness himself is incapacitated from acting as eyes and ears of justice, the trial gets putrefied and paralysed, and it no longer can constitute a “fair trial”.”
Recently, the Bombay high court deliberated on the issue of products being touted as ‘miracle cures’. The court was called upon to look into the advertisements of a Hanuman Chalisa Yantra which was advertised as a supernatural/miraculous object capable of removing all obstacles from a person’s life. The respondent contended that the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act 2013 was not applicable, and it would be the Cable Television Telecast guidelines which would apply. Rejecting the respondent’s contention, the court ruled that the enactment covered acts aimed at propagating or displaying miracles to earn money and the advertisement and sale of the object as a miracle cure for all ills fell within that definition. The court while bemoaning the presence of superstition observed, “Even many educated and highly educated persons get attracted to the things like mantra-tantra, black magic. Due to this superstitious approach of rich and poor, the educated and uneducated persons are being exploited by so-called Babas by selling articles by giving them names like Yantra, Ganda etc.”
In 2012, the Delhi High Court found an innovative solution to prevent the menace of illogical cures. The court was moved by Nirmal Baba, a spiritual guru seeking an injunction against certain articles he claimed were defamatory. The court in its judgment looked into the economy of spiritual gurus and noted that, whether in India or abroad, people all over are afflicted with problems, different in magnitude and type but for each of them, their individual problem or misery is the biggest crisis of their lives and anyone who can claim to heal or provide a shortcut to alleviating their pain and suffering occupies the stature of God in their lives. The people who are followers of various saints and godmen believe in their miraculous healing powers through which bodily afflictions or mental agony or pain could be cured, the court added. Interestingly, the court in this case awarded a conditional injunction by restraining the respondents from publishing defamatory material against the plaintiff provided he also restrained himself from giving absurd or illogical solutions to his disciples like asking them to eat rabri or masala dosa to overcome problems in life.
The real challenge for the law comes in terms of defining what would be ‘evil practices.’ Both the Maharashtra and Karnataka acts fail to provide a clear definition of what may be considered evil practices, the legislations provide for a schedule which enumerates certain practices but the same is not enough. The recently passed Assam legislation defines ‘evil practices’ as any act of healing practices and magic healing by any person with a sinister motive to exploit common people. The expansive and vague definition raises questions on implementation. If an unscientific practice does not aim to exploit people, is it allowed?
It is a fact that a large part of India’s population does not have access to public health facilities. In such cases, villages and neighbourhoods have several practitioners who may not be medically trained but at the same time are not quacks intent on exploiting people. These practitioners over the years become the first point of contact for people and vague legislation puts them at risk. In a country with several traditional branches of medicine, such an expansive definition will be reliant on the interpretation of courts which may vary from judge to judge.
Legislation to tackle superstitions requires nuance and a deep understanding of long-standing cultural practices. According to the National Crime Records Bureau, 2,871 people have died in the last two decades due to witch-hunting and human sacrifices. In 2022, there were 85 murder cases wherein witch-hunting was the motive and six cases concerning human sacrifice. Often, the victims of superstition are women and children. Considering the NCRB takes account of only reported incidents, these figures are only conservative estimates. Thus, there is no doubt that the issue is serious. However, hastily drawn laws are not only ineffective in dealing with the issue but can be used to settle scores.
Blind faith and superstitions often arise out of fear. One effective means to rid people of this fear is to provide social security so that basic needs of food, shelter and healthcare are taken care of; perhaps this is the ‘miracle cure’ for our nation.
Parijata Bharadwaj, a lawyer and researcher based in New Delhi, co-founded the Jagdalpur Legal Aid Group that offered legal services to adivasis in Chhattisgarh. The views expressed are personal.
