evidence: Pattali Makkal Katchi (political party in Tamil Nadu) [...] The AIADMK, the 374 c h a p t e r 1 0 [...] That it required an appeal to the highest court of the land to drive home such an obvious fact shows the degree of communal bias harbored by certain judges. The Supreme Court has defended Muslims against the High Courts in several other cases. The Allahabad High Court in Uttar Pradesh, which had already handed down a very controversial judgment in the Ayodhya case in 2010,86 thus decided in February 2018 to reclaim Waqf properties (mortmain properties bequeathed by Muslim notables to their community) in the state that did not meet zoning or architectural guidelines—both subjective notions. The Supreme Court stayed the decision before the BJP government could implement it.87 While judges—at least t hose on the Supreme Court—are often committed to mitigating the anti-Muslim bias of police officers, they do not always have the opportunity to do so, because perpetrators fail to be prosecuted. For instance, at the time of writing, only one case of lynching—among all those discussed in chapter 6, some of which date back many years—has landed in court. In many cases, no charges are brought, as police officers refuse to register victims’ complaints or have not interrogated suspects. The case of Pehlu Khan is sadly typical.