Abstract:Amidst high-profile incidents of hate violence against religious and caste minorities, the Indian Supreme Court laid down a series of guidelines to address mob violence and lynching in its July 2018 Tehseen Poonawalla order. The order mandated a police supervisory structure and stronger official accountability, more stringent penal provisions, victim and witness protection, and more expansive compensation and rehabilitation schemes. It also recommended the enactment of an anti-lynching legislation. This article contributes to the conversation about the order’s implementation by drawing from the empirical work conducted by Jindal Global Law School’s (JGLS) legal clinic on hate crimes. It focuses on how the police deploy their official discretion in investigating and prosecuting incidents of mob violence and lynching. First, based on detailed interviews of police officials, the article shows how the ambiguity of the category of lynching continues to plague the implementation of the order. Second, taking a case study of a potential hate crime investigation, it shows how the police structures investigations and charges to undermine the goals of criminal law. This article shows that police officials use their discretion to construct lynching — during various stages of investigation and charging — to obscure and invisibilise the crime. This quotidian exercise of discretion is shaped by broader systemic problems in India’s criminal justice system, especially its lack of independence, inadequate training, and institutional bias. The article advocates that these systemic concerns must be integrated in a meaningful response to mob lynching and hate crimes in India.

Monitoring via the Courts: Judicial Oversight and Police Violence in India

Confidence in the Criminal Justice System: Differences Between Citizens and Criminal Justice Officials in China

The Effects of Up-down Political Inspection on Bottom-up Public Complaints in China

Monitoring Courts: A Top-down or Grassroots Approach?

The crime vanishes: Mob lynching, hate crime, and police discretion in India

Transparency and Accountability in The Indian Judicial System: A Renewed Debate on Collegium System

Judges’ Perceptions of Systemic Racism in the Criminal Justice System

Conditional Justice: Evaluating the Judicial Centralization Reform in China

Political Resources and Divergent Court Empowerment in China: A Subnational Comparison

From Local to Upper Capture: The Chinese Experiment of Administrative Courts

Mapping critical success factors in efficient court management: two case studies from India

Judicial institutional design and corporate litigation: Evidence from a natural experiment in China

Informed Enforcement: Lessons from Pollution Monitoring in China

Non‐Governmental Monitoring of Local Governments Increases Compliance with Central Mandates: A National‐Scale Field Experiment in China

A field experiment on community policing and police legitimacy

Suing the Government under Weak Rule of Law: Evidence from Administrative Litigation Reform in China

Assessing the effects of body‐worn cameras on procedural justice in the Los Angeles Police Department*

Suing the Government under Independent Jurisdiction: Evidence from Administrative Litigation Reform in China

Empirical Examination of Factors that Influence Official Decisions in Criminal Cases Against Police Officers

The power of human rights tribunals: Compliance with the European Court of Human Rights and domestic policy change

Effect of Environmental Courts on Pollution Abatement: A Spatial Difference-in-Differences Analysis