Parents of Aradhana Could Face Jail Term Under the Juvenile Law

Jain teen’s parents could face jail terms of about three to ten years under juvenile law, writes Alok Prasanna Kumar

Factually, Aradhana’s unfortunate death cannot be equated to santhara since her fast was in fact broken and was undertaken for a specific period of time -- 68 days. (Photo: Rhythm Seth/ The Quint)

The death of 13-year-old Aradhana Samdariya in Hyderabad due to fasting for 68 days has raised questions on not just the religious practice of observing such an upvas but also how the state would deal with a case where the parents allegedly pushed the child to the brink. In establishing the parent’s criminal culpability, the police will have to show that her death, medically, was due to the fast, which itself was dangerous for children her age.

Depending on the material and whether the parents knew of or were aware of the dangers of such fasts, it is even possible that the police could “enhance” the charge to abetment to suicide of a minor, punishable under Section 305 IPC with a death sentence or life imprisonment.

Also Read: 9 Reasons Why Jain Teen Aradhana’s Death Was No “Accident”

13-year-old Aradhana died two days after completing a 68-day fast. (Photo: ANI Screengrab)

Debate Around Right to Practice Religion

Jain leaders’ defence that the police investigation into Aradhana’s death is somehow an assault on their religion, can be dismissed quite easily. The constitutional right to practice religion, whether as a group or as individuals, is subject to public order, morality and health. There is simply no constitutional basis for asserting that there is a constitutional right to put children in harm’s way in the name of religion.

Whether this is with reference to khatna, self-flagellation on Muharram or the dangerous stunts of “govindas” during Janmashtami, they are all equally dangerous and no civilised society should tolerate such practices in the name of religion.

Also Read: Aradhana’s Fast: Under Attack, Jain Community Asks ‘Why Only Us?’

Devotees pray in front of the dead body of Acharya Devendra Muni, a prominent from the Jain religious community in Bombay. (Photo: Reuters)

'Upvas' Can't Be Compared With Santhara

Aradhana’s death is being investigated by the Hyderabad police as culpable homicide not amounting to murder, punishable under Section 304 of the IPC. The girl’s parents have not yet been arrested but her death has pushed Telangana’s Jain community to strongly support the family as they insist that this was “purely voluntary” and any criticism will amount to an attack on their religion.

Initially, there were errors in the reportage of this incident as some confused it with santhara or sallekhana – the Jain practice of slowly depriving oneself of food and water till one dies. The Rajasthan High Court “banned” the practice after a PIL was filed last year, arguing that it amounted to abetment to suicide and those responsible for a person committing santhara to be charged for the offence under the IPC. In appeal, the Supreme Court has stayed the judgement of the Rajasthan High Court. At present, therefore, santhara is perfectly legal.

Also Read: Why Fasting Kills a Jain Girl and the Whole Religion

Proving Parents Guilty

• Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act says if an act results in serious mental or physical injury to the child, it can lead to imprisonment for three to 10 years.
  
• That Aradhana Samdariya’s parents allowed her to fast without ensuring medical assistance is enough ground for conviction.
  
• Police will have to establish criminal culpability of the parents by showing that death was due to upvas which can be fatal for kids.
  
• Police can charge the parents with abetment to suicide of minor under Section 305 IPC which prescribes death sentence or life imprisonment.
  

Factually, Aradhana’s unfortunate death cannot be equated to santhara since her fast was in fact broken and was undertaken for a specific period of time – 68 days. The number of days was chosen for religious significance and she seems to have undertaken such fasts previously also, according to her family members. Why she undertook the fast that turned fatal is a matter of dispute. Child rights activist Achyutha Rao claims that it was forced upon her by her parents in order to improve their family business while naturally the family claims otherwise, suggesting that she was “spiritually inclined”.

Santhara is also usually undertaken by adults and can be justified on purely non-religious grounds as well, as emanating from the right of an individual to decide what to consume and what not to consume. Indeed, the Rajasthan high court judgement “banning” it has been criticised precisely for the reason that it has not adequately appreciated this legal aspect of santhara.

The whys and why-nots of the issue are still up for debate but three facts are largely undeniable:

a. Aradhana was a minor.

b. She undertook a 68-day fast.

c. She died immediately after the fast

Punishment Under Juvenile Justice Act

Of course, despite the best efforts of well-meaning people, such barbarity continues and it’s quite disingenuous for Jain leaders to insist that the law allows the Jains to indulge in barbaric and uncivilised practice contrary to the prescriptions of law and the Constitution.

But what of Aradhana’s parents? What duties do parents have towards their children in such matters?

In this specific context, the third proviso to Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2016 attracts one’s attention. Under this section any parent who “assaults, abandons, abuses, exposes or wilfully neglects the child or causes or procures the child to be assaulted, abandoned, abused, exposed or neglected in a manner likely to cause such child unnecessary mental or physical suffering”, and if such acts result in serious mental or physical injury to the child, will face imprisonment for between three to 10 years.

The fact that Aradhana was allowed to continue the fast with little medical supervision (even if it was “voluntary”) or even the fact that the parents allowed her to begin the fast for such a long period of time without taking medical advice, could mean that her parents could face jail under this provision.

Using Religion to Justify Life-Threatening Practices

It’s a cruel irony that in a country with one of the worst rankings on the hunger index and high numbers of child malnutrition deaths, parents of a well-off teenager watched as their daughter “voluntarily” chose to harm herself so. Religion has been used to justify all sorts of injustices and atrocities on people, and it is once again being used to justify dangerous and life-threatening practices. In putting their faith over her life, Aradhana’s parents failed her. One can only hope that law enforcement authorities will also not fail her.

(The writer is a Visiting Fellow at Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy. He can be reached at @alokpi. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)