In a striking rebuke of backward practices, the Supreme Court of India expressed its dismay on Thursday over the treatment of women under the guise of witchcraft. The court described the public shaming and disrobing of a woman accused of witchcraft as a stain on the constitutional ethos of the nation.
The alarming incident took place in March 2020 in Champaran district of Bihar, where a woman was accused by 13 individuals of practicing witchcraft. The accusers, claiming that the elderly woman was a witch, publicly tore her sari and paraded her naked. A charge sheet was filed by the police, and a magistrate took cognizance of the charges. However, the proceedings were halted when the accused successfully petitioned the Patna High Court to stay the case.
The Supreme Court criticized the high court’s decision to stay proceedings against the individuals accused of humiliating and physically abusing the woman. Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol, presiding over the case, noted the distressing details of the accusations. They highlighted that such actions compromise human dignity and violate both national and international laws protecting human rights.
The Supreme Court emphasized that allegations of witchcraft often target vulnerable women, particularly widows or the elderly, integrating deeply with superstitions, patriarchy, and social control. The bench pointed out the disturbing nature of the crimes, stressing the urgent need to move away from such antiquated accusations which have historically led to tragic outcomes.
Despite the local court recognizing the gravity of the allegations, the proceedings were paused by the Patna High Court’s order. This prompted the victim to approach the Supreme Court, which was informed on November 26 that the petition to cancel the cognizance order had been withdrawn on November 22.
The Supreme Court remarked that the actions taken against the victim were not only a violation of her dignity but also a disturbing reflection of practices that should have no place in the 21st century. The justices were visibly shaken by “other acts” mentioned in the FIR, troubled by the fact that such atrocities are still occurring today.
