IndexAbstractIntroductionReasons and episodes of mass lynchingCaste and religionEconomy and politicsMass justiceWitch huntLaw and order on mass lynchingLegislationJudicial approachGuidelines and solutions for lynching violenceConclusionSummaryMoss lynching is often seen in India and has become common in recent times. The reason for lynching by a mob is because they have lost faith in law and justice due to the abuse of power under law and politics. We live in a place where law and politics have been praised and hesitated at the same time. So, none of us have a position on something. Just because everyone changes or acts based on the situation to protect themselves and survive. So when there is inequality in law and politics, it leads to mass lynching particularly in society against law and politics. Mob lynching is well known thanks to the Dadri incident in India. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original EssayLynching means the death of someone by a mob without legal approval. The main reasons for mass lynching in India are caste, religion, region, politics, witch hunt and intolerance. This article will deal with a study of various cases identified with lynching across India. Furthermore, mob lynching in India has covered several issues which have been observed by the political parties of the country from their point of view and regardless of whether the location is on the street or in the parliament, they use it to achieve their personal goals. political reasons. This is all due to one thing, that is, the law is meant for paper rather than people (when we compare it with the real scenario). IntroductionMob in English means unbridled or disorderly crowd. Lynching can be defined as a Latin American term, that is, a death sentence without any legal proceedings. Therefore, mob lynching means circumventing the law by a group of people to enforce justice on what they consider to be right. Many innocent people were affected and some even lost their lives without any crime. There are so many reasons for mob lynching, like bigotry, casteism, theft, kidnapping, rape, squire Romeo, anti-nationalism, witchcraft. hunting, class conflict and political reasons. The activity of mob lynching places a question mark on the rule of law as a group of people becomes the law, the judge and the executioner themselves. In mob lynching the involvement of the mob is certain, the process and type of violence are also somewhat the same although the reasons, bases and circumstances may be different. These crimes happen when people are incited by hatred and anger and prepare to take the law into their own hands. This violence is defined as a hate crime based on people's hatred towards a particular community, religion, region, caste or gender. It is crucial to think about why people suddenly consider a person harmful to the whole society and make such a drastic decision to kill them. Lynching is an unlawful killing by a senseless and morally corrupt mob. Mob lynching is not a new phenomenon in India, during the 1857 uprising mobs attacked British civilians, in 1947 partition mobs attacked families, individuals in villages, towns and even burned properties of people of a different religion. Finally, mob violence during communal fires, as during the Sikh riots(1984), Christian riots in Kandamahal (2009), Muslim, Bombay riots (1992), Gujarat riots (2002), Muzaffarnagar riots (2013) and Baksa riots (2015), most recently The Lynching mob it has not been mentioned in the Indian legal system and also there is no specific law or punishment for lynching. This leads people to practice lynching in society thinking that there is no law about it. Reasons and incidents of mob lynching The recent increase in mob lynching in India reveals barbaric and disturbing human behavior. Mob lynching is considered in the eyes of the mafia involved in lynching to be the wounding or killing of a person who is a criminal or accused of a crime against the community. Some of the notable cases of mob lynching that have occurred in India are as follows: Caste and Religion Violence in the name of caste and religion is deeply rooted in India. The increase in cases of mob lynching is mostly a result of intolerance and hatred towards other religions and castes in the name of religion, practice, traditions and croaking. In September 2015, a group of Hindu mobsters lynched Mohammad Akhlaq and his son Danish accused them of stealing and slaughtering calves and storing meat for consumption in Bidara village, UP, identified as the first case of a mob gang Hindu who lynched a Muslim in the name of cow or beef. The incident became infamous for being the lynching of Dadri and brought shame to the country. In August 2018, Rakbar and his partner were moving cows on foot. He was targeted by VHP Gau Raksha on suspicion of being a cow smuggler. He died while in police custody (Express, 2018). According to a recent report, 24 cases of lynching and abuse by vigilantes have occurred in recent years, resulting in the murder of 34 people and the rape of two women, most of them after 2015, and the victims they belonged to the Muslim minority community and the Dakit family. Other minority communities, along with the Muslim community, were also threatened by lynch mobs. Attacks against Christians continue to go unreported, but incidents involving churches and priests accused of converting Hindus to Christianity continue. So, in the name of faith and belief they are lynching something which is against the law and this leads them to blame the law simply because this activity is supported in society. Economics and Politics Economics and Politics have always played a important role in mass lynching. In villages, mass lynching is the easiest way to obtain land and property. It is easy to rally the crowd by making race, caste and gender a political agenda. In India, some political parties and groups are historically based on religion and caste, which spread hatred in society to play their political card during elections, resulting in mass attacks. It is the modest and ideal approach to win the political race in India, as the vast majority of the inhabitants of India are severe, superstitious and enthusiastic trick. Furthermore, they spark ideas to captivate the general public and exploit as political growth. Mass Justice Due to unawareness of legal provisions and consequences of violation of law, less severity from police and slow process of legal mechanism, people of India strive to be judges and take justice into their own hands by defining their own rules and regulations. In February 2016, JNUSU president Kanhaiya Kumar, arrested on charges of sedition, was beaten up by lawyers while being produced in the Patiala House court. In theMay 2017, an e-rickshaw driver was lynched by a mob of Delhi University students. The incident occurred after the driver stopped two drunk students from urinating in public, who then returned with a group of students to lynch the driver (First Post, 2017). In this the mob believes in justice because of the way they think and due to which innocent people get hit. Witch Hunt Witch hunt is a historical problem in India which is entirely based on mob lynching. “Witch hunts” include branding a woman a witch, mostly after an Ojha confirms that a woman is a witch, the process of prosecuting and executing that woman, often involving mass hysteria and lynching (The Prevention of Witch Hunting Bill, 2016). Witch hunting literally means harassing and killing a woman believed to have evil magical powers. Law and order on mob lynchingLegislationMob lynching is an intolerable wrongful act and gross cruelty to human rights, yet there is no national law on mob lynching despite the fact that India has a long history of lynching. Despite this, national enactments, for example, the Constitution of India, the Indian Penal Code, and the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 can be linked to lynching crimes. The National Crimes Records Bureau (NCRB), the main source of legitimate information on crime in India, does not record specific cases of lynching. Article 223(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 states that “persons or groups engaged in a similar offense at a similar demonstration may be attempted together.” In any case, such an agreement has not been used to convey fairness until now. Lynching cases are commonly described in segment 302 for murder, 307 for attempt to kill, 324 for causing injury, 147 for rioting under the Indian Penal Code, etc. Agreements, for example, area 153A (advanced hostility between gatherings and acts tending to support congruity); 153Acts aimed at maintaining national reconciliation), 295A (acts planned to upset severe feelings); and 295B (words proposed to offend) of the Indian Penal Code are seen as the law that abhors wrongdoing in India. It has been seen that in most lynching cases these agreements have been excluded from the police's first information reports against the accused. Furthermore, even where hateful acts have been recorded in these segments, the information is not provided disaggregated by personality groups. There is no real way to know, at that point, the contrast between the "person in question" and the "culprit". Comparative is the situation of "collective brutality" which is reported in the NCRB reports, with some record of the office who was the person in question and who was the culprits. In conclusion, at best, the above-mentioned laws are conservationist laws that constitute a crime, when the request and friendliness are disturbed and hurt severe feelings. There is little that punishes activity that is “hate-driven” and that verifiably includes wrongdoing by the dominant party rallying against a powerless network. “Contempt violations are displays of cruelty and terror, generally coordinated toward heretofore maligned and minimized gatherings.” Therefore, one cannot count on abhorring wrongdoing as harming these minorities. Without authentic documents, it is media reports and strange scholarly works that are the main sources of disdain for information about wrongdoings against strict minorities in India, however these are not satisfactory. There are some global and national tools that increase casualtiesof mass lynchings. For example, Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees Equality under the gaze of the law, an equivalent guarantee of the law and security against separation. Likewise, Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that “any promotion of national, racial or strict contempt involving segregation, an adversarial atmosphere or malice shall be limited by law.” Judicial Approach In Landmark Tehseen S Poonawala and Others V. Union of India1 judgment on 17 July 2018, comprising a three-judge bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud of the Supreme Court, recommended that the enactment of a special law on mass lynching by parliament can occur as “The fear of law and the worship of the command of law constitute the foundation of a civil society”. This petition has been preferred under Article 32 of the Constitution to take immediate and necessary action against cow protection groups indulging in violence. While explaining the importance of safeguarding constitutional and statutory law, every single court has cited the Krishnamoorthy case. In the 2015 Krishnamoorthy case the Supreme Court held that “law is the most powerful ruler in a civil society. The majesty of the law cannot be tarnished simply because an individual or group generates the attitude that the principles established by the law have given him the power to take its application into his own hands and gradually become law unto themselves and punish the transgressor according to their own hypothesis and in the way they deem appropriate. The Court observed that “no one is allowed to take justice into his own hands based on the imagination of his superficial judgment. Just as one has the right to fight for his rights before the law, the other has the right to be treated as innocent until found guilty after a fair trial.” In the case of Nandini Sundar and others v. State of Chhattisgarh the Court held that “it is the duty of the States, to endeavor, incessantly and consistently, to promote fraternity among all citizens so that the dignity of every citizen is protected, nurtured and promoted. The Court held that preventing such incidents is the responsibility of states. In Mohd Haroon and Others v. Union of India and another case it is held that “it is the responsibility of the State administration, in association with the intelligence agencies of both the State and the Centre, to prevent recurrence of communal violence in any part of the State. If an officer responsible for maintaining law and order is found negligent, he should be brought within the ambit of the law.” In this case, the Supreme Court held that “mob lynching is a violation of the rule of law and the values ​​of the Constitution. We can say without fear of contradiction that lynching by undisciplined mobs and barbaric violence resulting from incitement and incitement cannot become the order of the day. Such vigilantism, whether for any purpose or cause, has the effect of undermining the formal and legal institutions of the State and altering the constitutional order.” Guidelines and solutions for violent lynching In the Poonawalla case the Court stated that “with regard to numerous incidents of lynching and mob violence which do not need to be specifically mentioned as we will publish some guidelines covering the scope of preventive, remedial and punitive. “The Court says that in every district there should be a Nodal Officer, a senior.