Jagdeep S. Chhokar 
The bare facts
August 24, 2024:
CCTV cameras installed at the Gadpuri toll plaza on the Delhi-Agra national highway show a red Renault Duster being followed by a Maruti Suzuki Swift on the night of August 24.
Shots are fired from the Swift on the Duster. The rear wind screen of the Duster shatter. One person in the Duster is injured.
The Duster stops. Shots are fired on the Duster “this time from point-blank range,” a report says. The injured person dies.
September 03, 2024:
The police hold a press conference and announce the arrest of five persons riding in the Swift.
The reporting
Here is an excerpt from one of the many reports in the media:
“Kaushik, according to sources involved in the investigation and in Haryana Gau Seva Ayog, might have acted on a false tip-off, which was provided by rivals of one of his companions that night.
“Aryan had gone to Vardhaman mall with his landlady, her sons Harshit and Shanky, and their neighbour Kriti Sharma. Shanky was an accused in another attempted murder case. Harshit and Shanky had taken their Duster. Sources said Kaushik had received a specific tip-off about this Duster and that its occupants were transporting beef.
“‘Anil and his team tried to stop the Duster, but when they started speeding, the gau rakshaks felt that their information was correct and they started chasing,’ said a source. ‘But why they opened fire at the vehicle without any provocation is not clear,’ the source added.
“At one point of the high-speed chase, the gau rakshaks in a Swift fired at the Duster. A bullet hit Aryan in the neck. As he bled profusely, Harshit stopped the car near Gadpuri toll plaza. But the gau rakshaks caught up, walked up to the Duster’s window where Aryan was seated and fired at him again. Then they fled.”
A photograph of the report is given below:
The reason for providing a photograph is because the link to the story provides a detailed version and uses somewhat different terminology.
The meaning: Implied and otherwise
Here is an attempted analysis of the four paragraphs of one of the reports reproduced above.
The very first paragraph provides strong guideposts on what should the reader expect in the report. To paraphrase, it informs the reader that the shooter (Kaushik) is associated with a noble cause, The Haryana Gau Seva Ayog, and there is a likelihood that he might have “acted on a false tip-off”, the implication being that the shooting was not really his fault. He was involved in a noble cause and was misled.
The second paragraph provided further clues in the same direction. One of the occupants of the Duster, the vehicle which was shot at, “was an accused in another attempted murder case”, the message being, “he was not a good guy”.
The third paragraph casually slips in some seemingly unrelated information about one of the persons accompanying the deceased, saying, “Shanky was an accused in another attempted murder case”, and providing an apparent justification the act of shooting, saying, “Sources said Kaushik had received a specific tip-off about this Duster and that its occupants were transporting beef”.
These seemingly innocuous sentences are meant to subtly influence the readers’ minds.
The fourth sentence also provides a justification for the action of the shooter. It is clear from the sentence, “‘Anil and his team tried to stop the Duster, but when they started speeding, the gau rakshaks felt that their information was correct and they started chasing,’ said a source.”
The fifth sentence is the proverbial last straw. It appears to be a straightforward presentation of facts of the case but the use of the expression “gau rakshaks” for criminals, twice in four sentences, is a clear attempt to influence to evoke sympathy in the minds of the readers.
Who is a gau rakshak?
In an attempt to learn ‘who’ is a ‘gau rakshak’ and how does one acquire the title of ‘gau rakshak’, the Haryana Gau Seva Ayog, mentioned in the report was searched for. It turned out that this was formed under The Haryana Gau-Seva Aayog Act, 2010.
No mention of the expression ‘gau rakshak’ was found in the Act. The closet expression was found to be ‘member’.
Section 2(e) of the former, Gau-Seva Act, says ‘member’ means a member of the Aayog and includes the Chairman and Vice-Chairman.
Section 4 (1) says that the Aayog shall consist of two classes of members, official and non-official.
‘Official’ members described in Section 4(1)(I), are ex-officio government functionaries such as principal secretary, financial commissioner, director general of police, and so on.
‘Non-official’ members are described in Section 4(1)(II) of the Act, which says, “There shall be twelve non-official members including Chairman and Vice-Chairman to be nominated by the government”.
Further, Section 4(2) states the following:
“(2) The non-official members shall be nominated by the Government from amongst thc persons engaged in the welfare of cow’ namely:-
- six non-official members representing registered Haryana Rajya Gaushala Sangh in the State;
- six eminent humanitarians working selflessly for the welfare, protection and preservation of cow.”
The only other law found in the state of Haryana in this connection is The Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015.
This also does not have any mention of the expression ‘gau rakshak’, or anything else even remotely connected to it.
What does all this mean?
So, why do large sections of the media refer to an alleged murderer, or at the least, a shooter, as a ‘gau rakshak’?
Obviously, it is for every reader to decide, but how many readers (or as is these days, called ‘consumers’) of what is called, ‘mainstream media’, are discerning enough to think about this and how many just accept it on the face value? One possible explanation is that it is a deliberate insidious attempt by the so-called mainstream media to influence the thinking of their readers.
It is left for the readers to be careful of such attempts.