Comment

It was one of the most high profile murder cases of the 1980s: a swashbuckling minor royal politician suspected of murdering his lover’s husband, a nationally-acclaimed sportsman.

The media and public were riveted. The victim’s widow, the centre of this love triangle was under constant police scrutiny. Her personal diaries had been seized for clues. With its legendary heavy handedness, the police poured over the cringe-making outpourings of love and lust: “S and I were very attracted to each other, we made love and I came twice that night. Next day I came again” read one diary entry, in more or less words to that effect.

“What?!” senior inspector Goon assigned to the case is reported to have growled, “How can she come twice without going anywhere? And once again the next day? This calls for further investigation of her entries and exits. Call deputy commissioner Plod now!”

I was reminded of this case when I read with dismay the buffoonery displayed by the UP police while searching poor, hapless Aarushi’s mailbox for clues.

Anyone who lives in the 21st century and is even tangentially involved with young persons knows that the mildest mannered, stamp-collecting, myopic 12 year old transforms into a monster when attached to a keyboard. Wild, wicked pseudonyms, shock-horror language, in-your-face typography, innuendo, gaspingly intimate personal details, photographs in a clinch, declarations of undying love and atrocious spelling define the cyber-conversations of our teenagers. Does this mean they are deviant, criminally inclined, morally or sexually promiscuous? Noooo, it just means they’re normal.

Reading the clips from Aarushi’s chats and emails I was struck by how relatively tame and compliant they were. And yet, in the hands of the Noida police, dark and sinister meaning is being read into the most innocuous messages.

The more I think about it, the more I am led to conclude that our police force is hopelessly ill- equipped to cope with India’s post reform changes — the India of upwardly mobile middle class couples, of extended families that are not connected by blood, of professionals of both genders working together in close quarters, of teen rebellion, of cyber conversations.

And how could it have been different, when the police force has been untouched by reform itself? When salaries, exposure, training have remained more or less the same for the past 50 years. The way thepolice assassinated the character of a teenage victim, her much older household help, her father and her father’s professional colleague without a qualm was horrifying.

How well would you fare if you were under investigation? That naughty forwarded email you marked to a hundred friends, that voicemail you left a colleague, that stash of X-rated films, those bottles of whisky in your cabinet, your revolving door of attractions, assignations, alliances? What case would all this build up about you in the hands of someone who didn’t understand the cultural nuances of your class?

I am not saying all policemen are as out of touch and hamhanded as the ones on the Aarushi’s case. I have known Toynbee-quoting, consummate sophisticates, and towering moral forces. But these are exceptions. Most of them unfortunately are the types who when a teenage girl adopts the most common sms short form and writes in her email ‘I wnt do it again’— interpret it as ‘I want to do it again!

Rajesh Talwar may or may not have killed his daughter, but a hopelessly out of touch police force would be better off looking for the murder weapon rather than cultural nuances it can’t understand.

Email:s_malavika@dnaindia.net