BHRPC urges administration to look into missing case

BHRPC urges administration to look into missing case

: From our Staff Reporter

SILCHAR, July 20: Barak Human Rights Protection Committee (BHRPC), a human rights organization working in Asom, is deeply concerned over the report of disappearance of two labourers Paresh Das (55) and Dilip Das (45), both residents of Nandan Kanan Tea Garden area under the Jirighat Police Station in the district of Cachar-Asom. The two went missing on May 25, 2009.

Sources said the two missing persons used to buy damaged and unused utensils and other household things made of tin, steel and iron from the villages in the districts of East Imphal and Tamenglong in Manipur and sold them in Silchar.

The two left for work early on May 25 and never returned. The family members of Paresh and Dilip as well as people residing in Nandan Kanan Tea Garden are completely disturbed with the incident. They said both the missing persons were friends and partners in their small venture.

Paresh was the only bread winner of his family consisting of his 80-year-old mother Shefali Das, wife Unmoti Das (35) and a daughter Monika Das. Similarly, Dilip had to earn for his mother, wife Himani Das (29), a sister and two sons. Now they have been left to fend for themselves.

On May 26, both the Jirighat police station in Asom and Jiribam PS in Manipur were duly informed about the incident but till date no action has been taken on the matter. Local clubs and organizations got united and met the administrative and police authorities to press them into swift action.

Getting no satisfactory response, the people called for a 36-hour bandh of the NH-53 to demonstrate on June 4. Hundreds of people from neighbouring areas supported the demonstration. According to witnesses, when these unarmed peaceful people were demanding the administration to take proper actions by shouting slogans, a large number of armed para-military personnel from 72 Field Regiment of Assam Rifles camping nearby at Lalpani entered the spot and allegedly beat the demonstrators with sticks without provocations injuring about 40 people in the process including women and children, some of whom sustained serious injuries.

According to sources, when Assam Rifles personnel were threatening to open fire, a large force of Asom police reached the spot and brought the situation under control.

BHRPC has strongly condemned the action and urged the administration to pay adequate financial aid and other assistance to the family members of the missing persons and to order a prompt and impartial investigation into the hulabaloo created by Assam Rifles personnel into the peaceful demonstration.

Source: http://www.sentinelassam.com/state.php?sec=2&subsec=2&ppr=1&dtP=2009-07-21

Police Atrocity and Impunity

An Assam Police personnel posted at Tarapur Police Outpost under Silchar Sadar Police Station in Cachar, Assam on 2 March, 2008 rode a motor bike into the house of Mr. Manik Paul of Rabindra Sarani, Shivbari Road, Tarapur Part-VI, Silchar and grabbed Miss Mamon Paul, a 13 years old girl, by her hand and took her forcibly with him.

The said police personnel was Assistant Sub Inspector Mr. Kshitish Chandra Das who started his mission soon after Mr. Manik Paul, Mr. Pradip Paul and Mr. Sukumar Das of the same address had been sent to the Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silcharby by the In-Charge of Tarapur Outpost for treatment. They sustained serious head injuries caused by iron rods with which they were severely beaten by Mr. Bhajan Mazumder, Mr.Bokul Mazumder and Mr. Nitu Mazumder, residents of the same locality. It is alleged by Mrs. Shilpi Paul, wife of Mr. Manik Paul, that Mr Bhajan Mazumder and other are rich and powerful persons of the locality due to their affiliation with ruling party of the sate. They had been trying to exclude some people of the area who are supposedly supporters of other political parties from the use of water from a public tape installed and maintained by the Public Health and Engineering Department of the state government. Mr. Bhajan Mazumder and others were threatening women of the families of Mr. Manik Paul and others with dire consequences including grievous hurt and prosecution in case that they would not abstain themselves from fetching water from the tape. The persons threatened complained of the same to the Legal Aid Cell, a local legal aid organization. Rina Paul, a woman from a Paul family, stated that at about 8am on 2 March, 2008 when she and other women were filling their jars with water from the said tape Mr. Bhajan Mazumder and Mr. Bokul Mazumder, both are sons of Mr. Sudhir Mazumder and some other people started to assault the women. At that time some people came to rescue the women who were too beaten by iron rods by the said persons. Mr. Pradip Paul, son of late Pranesh Paul and Mr. Sukumar Das, son of late Naresh Chnadra Das sustained severe head injuries due to the beatings. Ms Rina Paul and others brought the injured to the Tarapur Outpost. Ms Paul further stated that the accused persons were also present there and a police man had conversation with them following which that police man filed a conspiratorial complaint against the injured persons and others who accompanied them.

Mrs. Shilpi Paul, the mother of Mamon Paul, stated that after her husband and other injured persons had been sent to Tarapur Outpost a police man in uniform but without wearing his name plate and cap came to their house with motor bike and forcibly entered in. He asked her daughter Mamon Paul to accompany him and upon her denial he grabbed her by the hands and forcibly making her to sit on the back seat of his bike started away not giving a little heed to her crying. Mrs. Shilpi Paul ran after them crying and screaming. She contacted Mr. Ranjit Bhattacharya and Mrs. Shobha Bhattacharya, President of Cachar Din Mazdur Union and President of All India Democratic Women Association (Tarapur Brach) respectively and informed them of the incident. Then all of them and other persons who came to know about it started to scream and cry. In the hue and cry people of the locality came out and were able to stop the fleeing police man at Sukanta Road, about one kilometer away from the house of Miss Mamon Paul. At the demand of people to disclose his identity the police personnel showed his name plate and told that he was an Assistant Sub Inspector of Police. Nonetheless, the ASI of police tried to go away with the girl. He hurled abuses at the protesting people, bullied them and threatened them that he would arrest all of them if they tried to prevent him. At that time another police constable in civil dress named Mr. Himangsu Das arrived in a motor car and joined the ASI at his attempt to take away the girl. But they failed in the face of resistance put forth by the people.

Mrs. Shilpi Paul filed a complaint regarding the matter with the Superintendent of Police, Cachar and at the advice of N S Gogoi, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Headquarter), Cachar submitted a formal complaint with Mr. Ashok Shaha, officer in charge of Silchar Sadar police station on 3 March 2008. A delegate of the people of Tarapur area led by Ranjit Bhtacharya, President, Cachar Din Mazdur Union and Sumita Bhattacharya, Secretary, AIDWA (Tarapur Branch) met the DSP who assured them of appropriate actions regarding their complaints. But till date no First Information Report was registered against either Mr. Bhajan Mazumder and other accused persons or the two delinquent police personnel.

On the other hand, the same DSP did not admit any delinquency on the part of the two accused police personnel. "When asked about the incident the DSP (Headquarter) laughed it away saying that the two police personnel had just asked eye-witness Mamon to come to the Outpost to interrogate her about the case, nothing more happened", reported Samayik Prasanga, a local daily news paper, on 4 March, 2008. In fact, it is nothing but an effort at covering up the alleged offences of his colleagues. It is a practice of the higher officials of Assam Police to save those who work at the behest of leaders and cadres of the political party in power in contravention of law and in breach of mandatory legal duties violating human rights of the citizens.

Even if the assertion of the DSP that the two accused police personnel just asked Mamon to come to the Outpost is to be supposed to be true for a moment for the sake of argument then this itself violates the Guidelines regarding Arrest. The Guidelines tells that if a woman or a child does not want to go to the police station his or her statement must be recorded at any place other than the police station.

Moreover, there is no purpose to ask her to come to the Outpost without registering an FIR and designating anybody as Investigation Officer. If necessary they could record her statement at her residence. A police officer must wear his name plate clearly showing his name and designation when he is conducting an arrest, investigation or other such procedure as per requirement issued by the Supreme court of India in DK Basu Vr. The sate of West Bengal and Guidelines regarding Arrest issued by National Human Rights Commission. Dispensing with this requirement and the requirement to be accompanied by a respectable local person which are mandatory in law, timing of the visit and other circumstantial evidences clearly establish his criminal intention.

In the course of its fact finding effort Barak Human Rights Protection Committee came across 43 persons all of whom witnessed the desperate efforts made by the said two police personnel to take away the victim girl with them. Their statements in a single voice accuse the police personnel of offences falling under section 34, 448 and 365 read with 511 of the Indian Panel Code, 1860. Both the police personnel made the attempt to kidnap the victim girl in furtherance of their common intention. So, as per section 34 of the IPC each of them is liable for the act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone. There does not arise any question on the entrance of the ASI into the house of Mamon that it was made with criminal intention because the eye witness accounts corroborated by the circumstantial evidences as stated above prove it beyond any reasonable doubt. Entering a house with criminal intention is an offence of house trespass as defined in section 442 calling for punishment under section 448 of the IPC. This is a cognizable offence. The offence of attempt (511) to kidnap (365) is also cognizable.

The complaint about head injuries caused to Mr. Pradip Paul, Mr. Sukumar Das and Mr Manik Paul by Mr. Bhajan Mazumder, Mr. Bokul Mazumder and Mr. Nitu Mazumder with dangerous weapons like iron rods which, if used to its full potential, is likely to cause death and hence comes under section 34, 324 of the IPC. This offence is also cognizable according to the First Schedule to the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973.

There is, therefore, a prima facie case of cognizable offences to be registered by an officer in charge of a police station under section 154(1) of the CrPC which says "Information in cognizable cases. (1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read Over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf." After the investigation is complete the police have to file charge sheet in the court of the chief judicial magistrate. Then it is up to the judicial authority whether to frame charges against the accused or not. It is not the business of a DSP to pass judgments acquitting the accused without an investigation and hearing the parties. The DSP transgressed his limits of business.

Non-performance of a statutory duty intentionally in disobedience of law by a public servant knowingly to the detriment of any person constitutes an offence under section 166 of the IPC. The complaints suggest that Mr. Satyen Gogoi, the Superintendent of Police, Cachar, Mr. N S Gogoi, the said DSP, and Mr. Ashok Shaha, the officer in charge of Silchar Sadar police station are guilty of this offence.

This offence also constitutes violation of legal rights as well as universally recognized human rights. Where there is a duty there is a correlative right. Duty of the public servants correlates itself with the rights of the public. So breach of duty under section 154 of CrPC amounts to violation of legal rights of the people. It is also evident from the circumstances of the case that some persons, both men and women, who are relatives to the victim girl, were assaulted and subjected to severe injuries with intention to deprive them of the right to use water from a tape installed and maintained for the public at public expenses in collusion with and with abetment o the police. This also amounts to violation of legal rights.

The right to personal liberty guaranteed in Article 21 of the Constitution of India of which no person can be deprived without the procedure established by law was also jeopardized by the said two police personnel by their attempt to kidnap the victim girl which subjected her to physical and mental trauma. This attempt to kidnap was also made in violation of 'the right to liberty and security of person' enshrined in Article 9(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966. India has bound itself legally by the provisions of this treaty and has the legal obligation to enforce the rights as incorporated therein.

The discriminatory treatment of victim parties by the police apparently on the basis of political opinion also violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India which guarantees equality before law and equal protection of law to all persons. This right to equality before law is also provided in Article 14 of the ICCPR, which was violated in this case.

Every right violated gives birth to a new right to remedies. Where there is a right there is a remedy is a basic principle of law. This right is also provided in the Constitution of India in Articles 32 and 226. The Supreme Court and High Courts in India held in many cases that right to remedies is also implied in Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 2(1) of the ICCPR also provides for this right to remedies and prohibits discrimination on the ground of, inter alia, political opinion explicitly. The right to remedies consists of (i) Access to justice by way of an impartial investigation and prosecution and conviction of the violators in a fair trial, (ii) Reparation of the harms done to the victims, and (iii) right to know the truth behind the al relevant matter relating to the violations. Non-registration of the complaints against the accused kills all these rights in the buds and ensures their impunity against the law of the land as well as international human rights law.

Impunity is the failure of the sate to provide to fully investigate the violations, to bring to justice and punish perpetrators, to provide victims with effective remedies and to take all necessary steps to prevent recurrence of the violations. Impunity multiplies violations and it deserves to be dealt with by the iron hands.

Barak Human Rights Protection Committee wrote a complaint o the Deputy Commissioner, Cachar on 11 March, 2008 demanding him i) to register the complaint of the victims as an FIR, ii) to arrest the accused and entrust the investigation of the case to a high level officer and iii) to pay adequate compensation to the victim girl. But no action has still been taken.

Armed together Against Civil Liberties and Human Rights

Although there is no existence of a single worth-mention indigenous Armed Opposition Group operating in Barak Valley, the southern part of the North Eastern state of Assam in India comprising of Cachar, Karimganj and Hailakandi districts with a population of about four million, it has been notified as ‘disturbed area’ under the infamous Armed Forces (Special Power) Act, 1958. It May not be denied that some members of the AOGs based in neighbouring states of Manipur, Nagaland or other parts of Assam try to use the area as a rest house, however, in most cases in vain mainly due to the fact that people of the area are peace loving and unsympathetic towards violent way of life. 80% of the people depending basically on agriculture are just struggling to survive the odds of weather and fate. They do not nurture any great expectations or exacting demands against the State or God. Are these the reasons why Indira Gandhi dubbed the valley as ‘Island of Peace’?

This ‘island of peace’ has been disturbed now for quite some time as much by the ‘disturbed area’ of the AFSPA as by activities of members of groups believing in Freedom of Assuming Special Powers with Arms. Many a family gets sandwiched between AFSPA and FASPA. This double victimization happens when some members of an AOG in the dead of night come to a house and ask for food, bed and other luxuries at gun points. There is no way out to escape the bullets even in case of hesitance, leave alone the option of denial. In the morning well after they had gone away the state security forces arrive and in the name of search and interrogation they virtually wreak havoc on the lives of the people present in the house. Severe beatings with gun butts and bayonets, destruction of household goods, sexual assault on women and children, humiliation and every other type of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are meted out. State security forces wear shield of legal impunity by virtue of ASFPA and members of AOG are stripped off any legal garb under the FASPA and no law can touch them. How many of such cases constitute a fit case for application of international humanitarian law?

There is a more terrific development in the situation now. A rapport has been developed, of late, between the members of state security forces and members of certain AOGs. They hatched a conspiracy to cut all tongues and fingers which would move in protest or rise to point the fact respectively and started acting to translate it in reality.

Such a collective effort of Assam Police, Central Reserve Police Force and an AOG come into light with death of Jamir Uddin Laskar, 35 years, of village Boincherra (also known as as Bhaicherra) under the Katlicherra Police Station in the district of Hailakandi in Barak Valley of Assam on 22 October, 2007 at about 10am caused by bullet wound fired upon by five CRPF personnel belonging to E-147 company camping at Gharmura, Hailakandi. According to the eye witness account of the incident the deceased was collecting grass for his cattle from a nearby paddy field when the jawans came accompanied by a villager known as CRPF informer who identified the deceased by pointing his finger and the jawans shot several rounds of bullets at him. The report of Barak Human Rights Protection Committee fact-finding team cites two possible causes of this murder: (i) Jamir Uddin’s elder brother was earlier killed by some members of an AOG and since then he was working actively against the AOG and was vocal against the rapport between the CRPF and that AOG and (ii) there was a family feud between the supposed CRPF informer and the deceased.

This is a case of blatant violation of the inviolable right to life recognized in Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which India is a party and has the obligation under Article 2 of that Covenant “to ensure that any person whose rights and freedoms as herein recognized are violated and shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity”. This right is also guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the right to remedies also flows from this Article. Moreover, in Indian ordinary criminal law this act of murder falls squarely under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). These sections of law impose a mandatory duty on the police and magistrate to register a First Information Report of the case and hold inquest and other preliminary inquiry. But the CRPF and Assam Police defying the authority of law and slapping on the face of logic registered an FIR against the deceased in Katlicherra police station.

It is a practice followed by the security forces in independent India established by the British police to suppress the freedom movement that if a person is in the hit-list simply go to his home, call him and shoot him to death. Thereafter file an FIR charging the deceased of attempt to murder under section 307 of the IPC and put on record that he was died in an encounter in your exercise of power either conferred by section 100 of the IPC which gives the right to self defence or 46(3) of the CrPC which empowers police to use force necessary to effect an arrest. The question whether the practice has any legality in it came for consideration before National Human Rights Commission in Case No. 234 (6)/93-94. The observation of the Commission deserves to be quoted in extenso: “Section 154 CrPC provides that if information is given orally relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, the officer-in-charge of the Police Station shall reduce it into writing. Section 156 speaks of power of Police officers to investigate cognizable cases. Section 157 provides that if a cognizable offence is suspected from the information received or from other sources, the officer-in-charge of the Police Station shall forthwith send a report of the same to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of such offence and he shall proceed to take up investigation of the case. Section 173 requires the investigation to be completed with expedition and as soon as it is completed to forward the investigation report to the concerned Magistrate. The investigation must be directed to find out if and what offence is committed and as to who are the offenders. If, upon completion of the investigation, it appears to the officer-in-charge of the Police Station that there is no sufficient evidence or reasonable ground, he may decide to release the suspected accused, if in custody, on his executing a bond. If, however, it appears to him that there is sufficient evidence or reasonable ground to place the accused on trial, he has to take necessary steps as provided in Section 170 of the Code. In either case, on completion of the investigation, he has to submit a report to the Magistrate. The report of investigation in such cases should be examined thoroughly by the Magistrate so that complete application of the judicial mind is available to ensure just investigation and upright conclusion. The Magistrate, on consideration of the report, may either accept the same or disagree with the conclusions and call for further investigation as provided in Section 173 (8) of the Code. If the Magistrate accepts the report, he can take cognizance of the offence under Section 190 of the Code.

“Section 157 (1) requires the officer-in-charge of the police station to apply his mind to the information received and the surrounding circumstances to find out whether there is reason to suspect the commission of a cognizable offence which he is empowered under Section 156 to investigate. He cannot mechanically accept the information received. When the information received indicates that death was caused in the encounter as a result of the firing by the Police, prima facie the ingredients of Section 299 IPC which defines culpable homicide are satisfied. This is sufficient to suspect that an offence of culpable homicide has been committed. Thus, Section 157 of the Code is attracted calling for investigation. Any plea like causing of the death in the case does not constitute an offence either because it was done in exercise of the right of private defence or in exercise of the powers of arrest conferred by Section 46 of the Code, can be accepted only after investigating into the facts and circumstances. Section 100 of IPC provides that right of private defence of the body extends to the voluntary causing of death if occasion for exercise of the right falls in any one of the six categories enumerated in that Section. Whether the case falls under any one of the six categories, can only be ascertained by proper investigation. Similarly, when Section 46 (3) of the Code is invoked, it has to be ascertained as to whether the death of the deceased occurred when he forcibly resisted the endeavour of the Police to arrest him and whether the deceased was accused of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Without proper investigation, the Police officer cannot say that the causing of the death in the encounter was not an offence either because it was done in exercise of the right of private defence or was done in legitimate exercise of the power conferred by Sec. 46 of the Code.

“Section 174 of the Code says that when the Police officer in charge of the Police station receives information that a person has been killed by another, he shall make an investigation about the apparent cause of death and submit a report to the District or Sub-Divisional Magistrate and also to take steps to arrange for the autopsy of the body. These provisions indicate that unnatural death has to be taken note of seriously by the Police and required them to find out by investigation the real cause of death. The responsibility is greater when it is the Police that are the cause of unnatural death. There is also a general feeling that most of the encounters are fake. It is, therefore, in public interest that the conduct of the Police involved is subjected to proper scrutiny by investigation. To avoid the possibility of bias, the investigation in such cases should be entrusted to an independent agency like the State CID by a general order of the Government. We are, therefore, of the opinion that when information is received in the Police Station about the causing of the death by the Police officer in an encounter, the officer-in-charge of the Police Station must, after recording that information, draw the inference that there is reason to suspect the commission of an offence and proceed to investigate the same as required by Section 157 of the Code. If such a procedure is not required to be followed, it would give licence to the Police to kill with impunity any citizen in the name of an encounter by just stating that he acted in ‘the right of private defence’ or under Section 46 of the Code. A procedure which brings about such unjust, unfair and unreasonable consequences cannot be countenanced as being within Article 21 of the Constitution.”

There is another more recent case of blatant disregard of law and human rights which, on the other hand, concretely establishes the theory of rapport between security forces and AOGs. On 19 March, 2008 at about 10.30 pm one Gypsy and two 407 truck-ful of CRPF personnel belonging to 147 battalion camping at Kashipur, Cachar along with Mr. S C Nath, an Assistant Sub Inspector of Police posted at Borkhola police station in Cachar, came at Behara Bazar under the jurisdiction of Katigorah police station, Cachar and picked up Mr. Ranjit Roy, Mr. Birbikram Deb and Mr. Raju Kar at gun point.

These three youth are ordinary residents of Behara Bazar and by occupation businessmen with small shops at the bazaar. As usual they were shutting the shutters of their shops after the day's drudgery to go home when they were accosted by the said security forces. The CRPF personnel started to beat them with gun butt and bayonet inflicting intentionally severe pain causing sufferings and hurts on their persons apparently to intimidate them and rob them of their belongings. When at the scream of the victims people started to come out and gather around the scene the CRPF men took them aboard a vehicle and went away.

They went to an adjacent temple named Loknath Mandir at Nilcherra and woke up Mr. Sandipan Chakrabarti and Subir Guha, drivers of the temple, who were asleep there. Here also the CRPF jawans applied their gun butts and bayonets causing more serious injuries to both the said persons with intention to force them to board a vehicle at which Mr. Swapan Bhattacharya, the priest of the temple, protested. Abuses and intimidation were also hurled at him. But on the possibility of waking up nieghbourhood people by this hullabaloo the CRPF personnel left these two victims.

Now they went with the first mentioned three victims not to the Katigorah police station under which jurisdiction they were in action but to the Borkhola police station and tried to persuade Mr. Ajijur Rahman, the Officer in Charge of the police station, to register an FIR against the victims by producing six fresh bullets and claiming that these had been found with the victims. After interrogation Mr. Ajijur Rahman denied to admit the CRPF theory that the victims belonged to any non-state armed organizations as well as to frame them as such. But Mr. Ajijur Rahman himself detained the victims illegally for the whole night instead of making arrangement for their medical treatment. He acted in contravention of strictures of the law of the land and international human rights law, perhaps, as well-known practice of Assam Police suggests, for a few thousand rupees from the victims.


There was an eerie environment of fear and tension everywhere in Barak Valley when the news reached people the next morning. Despite this, some individuals and organizations including Barak Human Rights Protection Committee came into action and contacted senior police officers and the Deputy Commissioner of Cachar. The five victims were sent to the Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar for treatment.

ASI S C Nath stated on 20 March, 2008 at the Office of the Superintendent of Police in the presence of media and social and human rights activists that CRPF personnel themselves had kept the bullets in the pockets of the victims forcibly. Senior CRPF officer S S Bohar made himself present at the SP office a little later and apologized to the people for the incident of the day before. He admitted that CRPF acted wrong information and also promised that there would be an inquiry into the matter. SP, Cachar also promised to take necessary actions in this regard.

On the other hand, Mr. Biswajit Sinha, the OC of Katigorah police station denied to register the complaints filed by the Mr. Ranjit Roy and his two companion victims and by the authority of Nilcherra Loknath Mandir as FIRs. Mr. Ranjit Roy and others alleged in their complaints that Mr Tapan Deb, Mr. Sujit Deb of village Dinanathpur and Mr. Sanjay Mahato of village Chayaranbasti were behind the whole incident. Local people alleged that these three persons are known as CRPF informer as well as members of an AOG having a camp in the area. Mr. Kanailal Bhattacharya, joint secretary of Desh Bondhu Club, was called on his cell number 94353 72029 from +9194356 66043 at 6. 57 pm on 21 March, 2008 and threatened with death apparently for his co-operation with BHRPC fact-finding team. The caller was Tapan Deb and the number from which the call was made is usually used by local chief of the AOG, Mr. Bhattacharya alleged. He also claimed that Mr. Tapan Deb, Mr. Sujit Deb and Mr. Sanjay Mahato have been using the AOG camp as their hideout. Local people also alleged that Mr. Haidar Hussain Laskar, an ASI at Behara Outpost works as an informer of the AOG more than as a police officer on the ground that if he was given any information regarding the trafficking of arms and ammunitions and other illegal activities of the AOG he cautions them instead of taking any actions against them.

In the complaint Mr. Ranjit Roy, Mr. Birbikram Deb and Mr. Raju Kar also alleged that the CRPF personnel took away rupees 2,275.00 (two thousand two hundred and seventy five) only, rupees 6,000.00 (six thousand) only and a wrist watch and rupees 2,320.00 (two thousand three hundred and twenty) only from them respectively at gun point.

The victims and local people alleged that this incident is only a spoke in the larger ring of the conspiracy between the men holding arms, legitimately or illegitimately, against the civilians to extort and exploit them and to ensure permanence of this terror regime by setting example of the persons who might dare to protest. Efforts of fabricating evidence by keeping bullets in the pockets of the victims and producing them at the police station and of efforts of framing them at least under section 122 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 intending to procure their conviction under that section attract section 195 of the IPC which is a non-cognizable offence. The CRPF personnel attempted to institute a criminal proceeding on the false charge of collecting arms with intention of waging war against the government of India. This attempt also amounts to a non-cognizable offence as per law laid down in section 211 read with sections 511 and 195 of the IPC. The threatening phone call to Mr. Kanailal Bhattacharya reinforces the conspiracy theory of the local people and sections 120B and 34 of the IPC come into play.

Fist of the many offences committed by CRPF and AP personnel that day is the criminal trespass fitting squarely under section 447 of the IPC. If they were to arrest the victims on a reasonable suspicion they should have procured warrant and informed the concerned police station and made themselves accompanied by a responsible officer of that police station and a respectable local citizen. They did nothing of the sorts. So they entered the property of the victims with criminal intention.

Further, they picked up the victims at gun points committing contempt of law of the arrest as established by international human right treaties and customary laws, the Constitution of India, the CrPC, 1973 and the mandatory requirements issued by the Supreme Court of India and Guidelines regarding arrest issued by the National Human Rights Commission. Their beatings by bayonets and gun butts causing acute pain and serious injuries to the victims not only violate UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials but also come under section 325 of IPC at the least. This act of violence by security forces also fits in the definition of torture given in Article 1 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment to which India is a signatory. Such torture is also prohibited by Article 7 and 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which India is a party. Torture also violates right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution as held by the Supreme Court in numerous judgments.

The act of dacoity alleged in the complaints of the victims is a serious crime falling under section 395 which is cognizable, non-bailable and punishable with imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for10 years or fine. Illegal detention of the victims at Borkhola police station by the OC also constitutes the offence of wrongful confinement under section 344 of the IPC.

So there appears a prima facie case against ASI S C Nath, CRPF personnel taking part in the 'operation' and supposed CRPF informers under sections 120B, 34, 447, 193, 325, 395, 506, 342 and 211 read with 511,155 of the IPC. Many of the offences are serious and cognizable.

Section 154 of the CrPC imposes a duty on an officer in charge of a police station to register the complaint in a proper form if he gets information regarding commission of a cognizable offence. The OC, Katigorah P.S. failed to perform intentionally this statutory mandate by denying to register the complaints of the victims. This, in turn, attracts section 166 of the IPC which lays down offence of disobeying law by public servant with intent to cause injury to any person.

This is a practice on the part of the security forces to maintain a de fecto regime of impunity for their delinquent colleagues. Impunity encourages repetition of the crimes and violations of human rights. So no violation is to be let to go unattended. Wherever there is a violation of a right there accrues a new right to remedies. Indeed the right to remedies is the most important human right. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides this right in Article 2. The UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment contains it in Article 14. The Constitution of India guaranteed the right to remedies in Articles 226 and 32 under which the Supreme Court and High Courts of India held that this right is also implicit in Article 21. Right to remedies include (a) access to justice consisting of impartial investigation of the complaint and prosecution and conviction of those found guilty in a fair trial, (b) reparation for harm suffered and (c) right to know the truth about the violations.

In which way the people should go for enforcement of their rights and exercise of liberties? The Gandhi way or the Mao way? 6 years of fast unto death of Irom Sharmila is not a very inspiring case in all respect. But it is always good to strive for apparent impossible and unattainable.

HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN BARAK VALLEY

HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN BARAK VALLEY IN ASSAM

Waliullah Ahmed Laskar



Moizun Nesa, a neighbourhood woman, informed Anowara and Sazna Begum that she had seen some five Central Reserve Police Force personnel going towards the field where Jamir Uddin was collecting grass. Three of them rushed to the field and saw Rezwan Uddin, who was known as CRPF informer, was asking 5 (five) CRPF personnel belonging to Gharmura Camp of E-147 company to shoot Jamir Uddin pointing his fingers towards the latter who was dumbfounded at the sight. At that moment Sazna, sister of the victim, and Anowara, wife of the victim, started to cry and beseech the men with arms to spare the life of Jamir Uddin at which they were also beaten, kicked, abused and humiliated. At the instance of Rezwan Uddin the CRPF fired a bullet targeting Jamir Uddin which was missed, the second shot also missed, but the third bullet hit on the back of the target, who had already started to run away, and piercing his chest exited. The critically injured victim was sent to the Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar where he was declared dead at 6-30 P.M that day. Thus, in a home invasion the said security forces shot dead Jamir Uddin Laskar, about 35 years of age, of village Bainchera (also known as Bhaichera) under the Katlichera Police Station in Hailakandi, Assam at about 10 am on 22 Oct, 2007. At the time of the incident the deceased was collecting grass to graze his cattle from a paddy field near his house where five CRPF men accompanied by one Rizwan Uddin accosted him. Such incidents have kept happening in Barak Valley.

Barak Valley is that part of the globe which is located in southern part of the state of Assam in India where about five million people live mainly on agriculture. Almost 80% people of Barak Valley belong to Bengali speaking Hindu and Muslim communities and others are Manipuri (Both Meitei and Bishnupriya), Hindi speaking people, Dimasa Khasi-Pnr, Hmar, Riang etc. while Assam, or for that matter the entire North East India is populated by nearly 70 ethnic groups.

The land now known as Barak Valley was in part an independent kingdom known as Cachar before the British annexed it to the empire in 1832 and the rest was a part of Sylhet district of Bengal. The districts of Cachar and Sylhet along with Goalpara were appended to Assam in 1874. At the time of partition in 1947 following the referendum as to the question of joining India or Pakistan held in Sylhet as per recommendations of the Redcliff Commission the area covering the jurisdiction of three and half police stations of Sylhet district joined India and the district of Cachar was formed of four sub-divisions, namely, Cachar, Karimganj, Hailakandi and North Cachar Hills. Later on North Cachar Hills was curved out form Cachar and annexed with Mikir Hills. Subsequently in 1983 Karimganj and in 1993 Hailakandi were declared separate of Assam. Now Cachar, Karimganj and Hailakandi districts are known as Barak Valley for their relative geographical and cultural unity after the name of the main river of the area.

After a few years of the independence of India the ethnic groups of North East India, a region rich with cultural and geographical diversity, tended to slacken ties with each other and the main land India. Nagaland, Mizoram, Meghalaya and Arunachal were curved out from Assam and were made separate states. This politics of assertion and establishment of separate identity gave birth to the violent secessionist movements through the pangs of Language Movement of 1961 in Barak Valley, Assam Movement of seventies culminating in the Neelie Massacre of 1983 ultimately resulting in formation and operation of various underground outfits turning the region into a conflict zone. The battle field where the main casualties of the conflicts are security, justice, peace and human rights includes Barak Valley also. The valley being a free play ground of corruption, nepotism, political vested interests as well as illiteracy and poverty the human plight here got further worsened.

The human rights situation is very pathetic in the valley mainly due to some factors such as; firstly, draconian laws kept in force by the Indian State in the area. The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, for example, empowers even a non-commissioned officer of force to shoot to kill anybody, if he is in the opinion that it is necessary to do so. They have got total impunity under the Act. Secondly, insensitivity of the other police forces towards the rights of the people. They still operate under colonial Police Act of 1860. Last but not the least is illiteracy and unawareness of the people regarding their rights and duties. A sample survey conducted by Barak Human Rights Protection Committee (BHRPC) indicates that 76% of the people don’t know that they have the right to know the grounds of arrest at the time of arrest by a police officer. 78% of the people are not aware that an arrestee must be produced before the magistrate within 24 hours excluding the time of journey. 83% people have no knowledge about the right to free legal aid. 51% believes that it is the fate of an arrestee to be tortured mildly in police custody. 83% of those interviewed told that they think it is not wrong for an arrestee to be handcuffed in all circumstances. 87% of the people have no knowledge about the arrest memo. 65% think that police can arrest women even in the time between sunset and sunrise. So, it is no wonder that rights of arrestee are violated by the security forces in the one way or the other nearly in all cases of arrest, detention and during other pre-trial procedures.

As a result, there are innumerable cases of human rights violations by the security forces in the valley such as non-registration of FIR in genuine cases, implicating innocent people in trumped up cases, harassment and violence by the police in the name of search and raids, detention and arrest in false charges, use of excessive force in time of arrest even to the extent of causing serious injuries, tortures in custody sometimes leading to custodial deaths and rapes, opening fire leading to serious injuries and death in the face of slightest or no provocation, staging drama of encounters, enforcing disappearances and many other such form of violations and violence against the people showing utter disregard to the law of the land.

Some recent grave cases of violation of human rights perpetrated in the valley, which are documented by BHRPC, would drive home the points made above. So some of them are given below as samples:

1. Illegal detention of Hussain Ahmed Laskar
A senior citizen named Hussain Ahmed Laskar, S/o Late Twahir Ali Laskar of village Neairgram Pt.-I under Silchar Sadar Police Station in Cachar district in Assam was detained by the Officer-In-charge of the said police station at 3 Pm on 7/10/06. After some time, when he was contacted and informed of the fact, the Secretary General of Barak Human Rights Protection Committee visited the police station and came to know that the detainee had come to the Police Station to enquire about the charges of offences against one Habibullah Laskar and others. Mr. H A Laskar is a retired head master and a respectable person in his village. However, the Secretary General came to know that there is a police case against him vide Silchar Police Station Case No. 1208/06, although, the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court had accorded him pre-arrest bail regarding the case vide BA No. 2401 / 2006 dtd. 27-09-06. As the Secretary General smelt foul play in the offing on the part of the police against the detainee he guarded him physically till 2 AM. The senior citizen was kept sitting and standing and meted out rude behavior the whole night. Next morning a team from BHRPC led by Advocate Imad Uddin Bulbul, legal adviser to BHRPC visited the police station and rescued the detainee. He was detained illegally for about 23 hours by the police without following the required procedure of arresting persons established by law. The detainee informed that before the visit of Secretary General, police were pressing him hard for Rs. 10,000.00 (Ten thousand) only as the price for his release.

2. Death of Hashmat Ali Caused by Police in his Home
A daily wage labourer named Hashmat Ali, son of Imam Uddin of Vill. Burunga Part-1 under the Katigorha Police Station in the district of Cachar, Assam was killed by police personnel of Kalain Outpost in the intervening night between 40 April & 1st May’2007. It was not a case of mere shootout but it was a pre-planned action of home invasion. In-charge of Kalain outpost Sub Inspector Sewa Sinha led the invading police team which at about 11-30 pm attacked the house of the deceased and ferociously made their way into the rooms breaking the doors. They started breaking utensils and furniture and abusing, beating and humiliating the inmates of the house including women and children. Being terrified the deceased desperately jumped through the window and ran towards the paddy field. When he was about 200 metres away constable Tapan Hazarika opened fire and shot three rounds. Neighbours of the deceased testified that they heard three times the sound of firing. The deceased died on the spot. Police, without informing the family members, brought him to the Silchar Medical College & Hospital, Silchar. The doctors of SMCH declared him dead. The widow of the deceased was informed in the next day that her husband was getting treatment at SMCH. When she reached the Hospital the performance of autopsy of the body of her husband was complete.

3. Death of Pia Das and Harassment of Kiran Sharma in the Hands of Police
A young woman named Pia Das alias Piu Das, wife of Shankar Das of Atal Basti, Silchar under the Silchar Sadar Police Station in Cachar, Assam died abnormally at about 2.30 pm on 19th Apirl, 2007 at Silchar Medical College & Hospital, Silchar. She was married to Shankar Das in 2002 and they were blessed with a son now aged about four years named Rahul Das. Late Pia Das had suffered mental and physical torture in the hands of her husband and in-laws for her inability to satisfy their demand for dowry. Like many other day on that fateful day she was beaten by her husband mercilessly. Her husband struck on her head with a sitting stool for which she fell down and became unconscious and later, as stated above, she breathed her last in the hospital. Mother of the deceased Kiran Sharma went to Ghungoor Outpost to lodge a complaint on this issue on 22/04/07. The In-charge of the said Outpost Sub-Inspector Nihar Ranjan Das demanded her rupees 5000.00 (five thousand) only for registering the complaint as an FIR. Subsequently Kiran Sharma informed the Deputy Commissioner, Cachar about the circumstances in which her daughter died and demand of bribe by police. She also lodged a complaint in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar regarding the matter but no action towards enforcing her right to justice, truth and reparation has been taken.

4. Custodial Torture and Death of Motahir Ali
An innocent poor labourer named Motahir Ali Tapadar, 38 years, S/o late Akaddas Ali Tapadar of village Bhatgram (also known as Bhatghat and/or Brahmangram) under the Katigorah police station of Cachar, Assam died on 21 September, 2007 in the custody of police personnel posted at Kalain Police Patrol Post (PP). He was taken into custody on 20 September, 2007 by Narain Tamuli, the In-charge of the PP in connection with Katigorah Police Station Case No. 453/07 which charged him of assault to his co-villagers Sahabuddin and others. When Alimun Nesa, widow of the deceased, her minor son Salman Uddin and other co-villagers visited the PP, they saw Sub-Inspector Narain Tamuli, Assistant Sub-Inspector PR Nath and Constable Ramzan Ali were beating and torturing Motahir Ali in other manners brutally. When Alimun Nesa beseeched for mercy and release of her husband the police assaulted her and her minor son and others were threatened, taunted and bullied away. In the morning next day she again she came with her son to see her husband and she saw her husband was still being tortured and his condition had got very bad. Once again she wept and cried for mercy. This time SI Narain Tamul demanded form her a sum of rupees 10,000.00 (ten thousand) only for releasing her husband. At the expression of her inability to satisfy this demand the said SI canned her several times and even kicked her in the belly in her pregnant condition. Her minor son Salman Uddin was also assaulted. In the way police kept torturing Motahir Ali till he breathed last at about 1pm.

5. Destruction of Police Post by Police Themselves and Charging Innocent People
In the wake of the incident of torture and death of Motahir Ali Tapadar on 21 September, 2007 in the custody of police posted at Kalain Police Patrol Post under Katigorah Police Station in Cachar, Assam the police themselves set fire on the PP and Bhairavpur-Klain Gaon Panchayat office situated in the same campus and burnt them down in order to distract the attention of people from the death of Motahir Ali. Subsequently SI Biswajit Sinha registered Katigorah Police Station Case No. 455/07 under sections 147, 149, 447, 448, 336, 333, 436 and 307 of the Indian Panel Code, 1860 against Faruk Ahmed Laskar, president of Kalain Citizen Forum and other 500 (five hundred) unidentified persons accusing them of the very offences which were committed by police themselves. In connection with this trumped-up case the police conducted frequent raids, caused persecution and harassment to the people residing in the village of Bhatgram. Police also arrested Faruk Ahmed Laskar, Ibazul Haque Laskar, Imamul Hoque and Saidur Rahman Barbhuiya who were later accorded bail by the Gauhati High Court.
6. Serious Injury to Saidur Rahman in Police Firing and His Subsequent Arrest
A boy aged about 17 years named Saidur Rahman Barbhuiya, son of Abdul Nur Barbhuiya, Village: Dhumkar under Katigorha Police Station in Cachar, Assam was hit by a bullet in his left leg and seriously injured on 21 September, 2007. After the death of Motahir Ali Tapadar in police custody on 21 Sept. 2007 the people of Kalian gathered in front of Kalian police petrol post and demanded the arrest of Narayan Tamuli and other police personal who were responsible for the death of Motahir Ali. To disperse the gathering police opened fire and caused 80 rounds of firing at the order of Circle Inspector. P.S Das. At that time the victim was watching the incident from the roof top of a nearby two storied building when he was hit by a bullet and badly injured. He was admitted to the Silchar Medical College & Hospital, Silchar. After a little recovery when he was released from the hospital the police arrested him in connection with the Katigoraha P.S. Case No. 455/07, which was registered against the persons gathered in front of the PP and demanded arrest of the police personnel responsible for the death of Motahir ALi bringing false charges against them, showing utter disregard to the logic and common sense. Saidur Rahman was watching the incident from the roof top of a two storied building when he was hit. So, he can never be a part of the gathering for the dispersal of which police opened fire. Moreover, as per the claim of the police, they fired in the air in order to frighten away the crowd. If he was a part of the crowd it is clear that all the bullets are not fired in the air as they claimed.

7. Death of Jamir Uddin Caused by CRPF Personnel in a Home Invasion
In a home invasion 5 (five) Central Reserve Police Force personnel belonging to Gharmura Camp of E-147 company at about 10 am on 22 Oct, 2007 shot dead one Jamir Uddin Laskar, about 35 years of age, of village Bainchera (also known as Bhaichera) under the Katlichera Police Station in Hailakandi, Assam. At the time of the incident the deceased was collecting grass to graze his cattle from a paddy field near his house where five CRPF men accompanied by one Rizwan Uddin, who is known to be a CRPF informer, accosted him. His wife Anowara Begum, sister Sazna Begum and neighbour Moizun Nesa came to the place of occurrence after getting information. They saw and heard Rezwan Uddin was asking the men in uniform to shot Jamir Uddin pointing his fingers towards the latter who was dumbfounded at the sight. At that moment Sazna and Anowara started to cry and beseech the men with arms to spare the life of Jamir Uddin at which they were beaten, kicked, abused and humiliated. At the instance of Rezwan Uddin the CRPF fired a shot targeting Jamir Uddin which was missed, the second shot also missed but the third bullet hit on the back of the target, who had already started to run away, and piercing his chest exited. The critically injured victim was sent to the Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar where he was declared dead at 6-30 P.M that day.

8. Murder of Leela Begum and Subsequent Displacement of Her Mother and Children with the Abetment of Police
A widow named Leela Begum of Pangram Part-IV under the jurisdiction of Udharbond police station, Assam was strangled to death on 8 Nov, 2007. Kabirun Nesa, the mother of the deceased, was warned of grave consequences that she will be killed if she files complaint with the police. However on 14th Nov, 2007 Kabirun Nesa lodged a complaint with the chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar regarding the incident. The Court of CJM forwarded the complaint to Udharbond police station for registration of an FIR and investigation. But the police did not respond. More over, Kabirun Nesa was driven away from the house of the deceased where she was staying and looking after the two minor children of the deceased. All of them now left the house to save their lives and was wandering here and there in the city of Silchar. Members of Barak Human Rights Protection Committee met them and took them to the Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of Police, Cachar separately on 20 November, 2007. Both the officials were urged by the organization to provide the victim with safety and security and to rehabilitate them in their house as they were rendered shelter-less. The officials were also requested to arrest the accused of the said murder case expedite the investigation of the case. But till date no action has been taken towards enforcing the victim’s right to justice, truth, reparation and shelter. At the request of the organization a benevolent person of Madhurband, Silchar gave them temporary shelter.

9. Assault on Journalist Facilitated by the Wilful Negligence of Police
Abijit Bhattacharjee, reporter with Barak Television Natwork, Anup Das camera person of the same channel and another camera person was assaulted and injured by a group of hooligans when they ware covering on-going polling at Atal Basti J.P Das L.P school poll centre on 9th January, 2007 in Cachar, Assam in the presence of security personnel posted there. As the police remain silent spectators the attackers inflicted such grave injury to Abijit Bhattacharjee that he had to remain at Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar for more than 14 days. However, an FIR was registered against the accused but none is arrested and no action has been taken against the negligent police personnel.

10. Rape in Silchar Medical College Campus
A minor girl named Rustana Begum of 15 years was raped in Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar at about 5 pm on 2/2/08. She was attending her mother Sunapakhi Bibi of Kanchanpur Pt-I, Hailakandi, Assam, who was undergoing treatment at the orthopedic department of the Hospital from 10th January, 2008. At the time of incident Rustana Begum was going to the canteen to fetch hot water for her mother. Two security guards named Rahim Uddin Mazumder and Bishawjit Ghose, both of whom hail from Masimpur, Silchar and employed by Barak Security Agency, a private security providing firm, which was providing security to the said hospital under contract, stopped her at the door of the room of Medical Record Department when she was going to the canteen to fetch hot water and forcibly brought her in Out Patient Department room which usually remain closed at such hour of the day and they committed rape alternately on her. All this happened before the eyes of Atul Das, a fourth grade employee of the said Hospital who remain a silent spectator. Shushantha Nath and Surendra Singh, the two in-charges of security at the said Hospital on behalf of the BSA, threatened the victim, her mother and her relative Abdul Mannan with dire consequences and asked them not to disclose the incident and inform the police. However, Sunapakkhi Bibi, the mother of the victim lodged an FIR regarding the matter vide Silchar Poloce Station Case No 208.08 dtd 6/02.08. Abdul Mannan also filed a complaint with the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar regarding the threat to life of the victim, her mother and his own life under section 107 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 on 7/02/08.
In the present state of the things nobody hopes that the victims may be given their rights to justice, truth and reparation. Violators would not be brought to justice as there prevails a de juro as well as de facto impunity regime in the region. So the people would go on suffering at the hands of those whom they pay.

Cases of Gross Violation of Human Rights in Barak Valley of Assam

Cases of Gross Violation of Human Rights in Barak Valley of Assam

The Assam Police and CRPF personnel have been violating human rights systematically in Barak Valley killing serially innocent persons, denying justice, framing fake charges, arresting and detaining people in trumped-up cases, and raiding, harassing, abusing and humiliating in false charges.

There are four such cases of gross violation of human rights perpetrated recently in the valley:

1. On 19 April, 2007 one Pia Das alias Pria Das, aged 25, wife of Shnakr Das under Silchar Police Station in Cachar, died abnormally in Silchar Medical College Hospital, Silchar when she was admitted there in a very critical condition. According Kiran Sharma, and Rahul Das, the mother and minor son of the victim, Pia was badly beaten by Shnakar Das, her husband. They allege, he used to torture, abuse and beat her always during her conjugal life for dowry. That day he hit her on the head with a stool to which she succumbed. Afterwards Kiran Sharma went to Gunghoor Outpost to lodge FIR but Sub Inspector N R Das, in-charge of the Outpost denied to register the case and bullied and her demanded her five thousand rupees as the price of registering the FIR. She lodged complaint to the Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of Police. But till the date no action has been taken regarding the investigation of her case and delinquent police officials.

2. One Hashmat Ali, aged about 40, of village Burunga, Bihara under Katigorah Police Station in Cachar was gunned down by a police team led by S I Sewa Singh, in-charge of Bihara Outpost in the intervening night between 30 April and 1 May of 2007 at his house. There was a quarrel between his father Imam Uddin and Uncle Kamal Uddin over the right to use of the ghat of their ancestral pond. In the morning of 30 April Kamal Uddin filed a complaint against Imam Uddin and his son Hashmat Ali, the victim alleging threat to his person and property from the accused. It should be noted that such cases come under section 107 of Criminal Procedure Code which are filed with executive magistrates. In the night at about 11pm Sewa Singh arrived at the house of Kamal Uddin with a police team. They attacked the house of Hashmat Ali at about 12 O' clock when inmates were sleeping. Police broke down the doors, entered the house and started breaking and destroying household things. Being terrified by this sudden heavy attack Hashmat jumped through a window and ran towards paddy field. Police opened fire and shot him dead. The district administration and police are trying to explain the case away terming it as an accidental death in stark contradiction with the facts known to all.

3. The police posted at Kailain Patrol Post under the Katigorah Police station in cachar killed one Motahir Ali Tapadar, aged 38, son of late Akaddas Ali Tapadar of village Bhatgram, Kalain under the same police station on 21 September, 2007. The victim was in their custody at the time of his death. He was arrested by the police on 20 September in connection with a complaint against him. This complaint was resulted from a quarrel of his family with a nieghbouring family over the toys of the kids of the two families. In the evening of the day of arrest Olimun Nesa visited the said PP with some respectable person from their village to see her husband. They saw that S I Narain Tamuli and other police personnel were beating, abusing and humiliating her husband. When she tried to dissuade the men in uniform they beat and kicked her too. In the morning next day, that is 21 Septebmer, Narain Tamuli brought Motahir out of PP house to take him to the court. Olimun Nesa came and beseeched Tamuli to release her husband. Tamuli demanded her ten thousand rupees and he threatened her that otherwise he would kill Motahir. In fact he again started to beat and kick him in full public view. When the condition of Motahir deteriorated beyond limits Narain took him to the Kalain Primary Health Centre. Here also he tortured, beaten and kicked Motahir. At about 1.30 Motahir breathed his last. After the death local people gathered in front of Kalain PP and shouted slogans demanding arrest of Narain Tamuli. Police started administering lathi-blows on the member of crowd at which people started to throw stones. Police opened fire and shot 80 rounds wounding a boy of 17 namely Saidur Rahman of Dhumkar who was wtching the incident from roof top of a nearby house. Being terrified people got dispersed. But then the police themselves set fire on the PP house Gaon Panchayat Office building and burnt them down. As per their plan police lodged an FIR charging falsely one Faruk Ahmed and other unidentified five hundred people under many non-bailable sections of the IPC including 309.In connection with this fake case police arrested Faruk Ahemd, Imamul Hoque, Ibajul Hoque and seriously wounded Saidur Rahman.


4. It was reported in the news papers on 23 October, 2007 that on 22 October at about 10am five Central Reserve Police Force personnel belonging to Gharmura Camp of E-147 Company shot dead one Jamir Uddin Laskar of about 35 years of village Boinchera (also known as Bhaichera) under the Katlichera Police Station in the district of Hailakandi in Barak Valley of Assam. Members of the Barak Human Rights Protection Committee talked with family members, relatives and nieghbours of the deceased, local journalists, CRPF personnel of the said camp and police personnel of Katlichera Police Station. According to the sources, other than the two mentioned last, the victim Jamir Uddin Laskar was a poor daily wage labourer. He is an innocent peace loving and law abiding citizen. There were no complaints whatsoever against him in police records. His nieghbour Moijun Nesa states that in the morning of the day of incident the victim was collecting grass to graze his cattle from a paddy field adjacent to her house. At about 10am she saw five CRPF men accompanied by one Rezwan Uddin, who is known to be a CRPF informer, going towards the paddy field where the deceased was working. She smelt something wrong and informed Sajna Begum and Anwara Begum, sister and wife of the victim respectively. When three of them went to the place of occurrence they saw Rezwan Uddin identifying the victim was asking the men in uniform to shot by pointing his fingers towards Jamir Uddin who was dumbfounded at the sight. At that moment Sajna and Anwara started to cry and beseech the men with arms to spare the life of Jamir Uddin at which they were beaten, kicked, abused and humiliated. As per the accounts of the eye-witnesses named above, at the instance of Rezwan Uddin a bullet was shot targeting Jamir Uddin which was missed, the second shot also missed but the third bullet hit on the back of the target, who had already started to run away, and piercing his chest exited. The critically injured victim was sent to the Silchar Medical College Hospital, Silchar where he was declared dead at 6.30pm that day.

These horrendous incidents robbed the citizens of the valley of all senses of security. It seems, we are living at the mercy of those whose duty it is to protect us.

Nandigram Is An Act of Treason

Nandigram Is An Act of Treason

Nandigram is an act of treason. The CPIM, led by Karat at the centre and by Buddhadeb at state level, unleashed a large group of mercinery killers to occupy an Indian territory known as Nandigram in West Bengal. It was a pre-planned operation. The operation hatched by high level leaders of the party. They named it 'Operation Nandigram'. They virtually waged, fought and won a war of occupation against India. In the process more than 34 persons were killed,4/5 women were gangraped, thousands were rendered homeless,hundreds of houses and shops were burnt down and lakhs of people lost their sense of security and worth of existence. And most part of the genocide and vandalism was carried out not by the police but by cadres and other mercinary goons of the CPIM.Chief minister of West Bengal still talking in terms of 'US' and 'THEY'. The people who did not and don't support him and his party are termed as 'OTHER'. Whoever those other may be they can be killed or can be muffled their voices. These OTHERs may include Star Ananda, Medha Patkar, Aparna Sen, Rituporno Ghose, Shankha Ghose and many such persons. It does not matter. Whoever dares to tell the truth and protest against horrendous genocide or barbarism he or she belongs to the OTHER and shall be shut up.CPIM leadership claimed that Bhumi Uchched Protirod Committee took help of the Moists. As to the claim we can say: 1. If a group of persons help some hapless and helpless people what is wrong in it? 2. The Operation Nandigram ended, CPIM hoisted their flag but why they could not find a single person belonging to Maoist group. 3. If with the help of Maoists or any other group some people of Nandigram tormenting some other people then where were the West Bengal Police? Why the government did not deal with them in accordance with the law? 4. For what reasons the perpetrators of 14 March massacre were not nabbed and brought to book? 5. Why CRPF were not deployed when the state police failed? For keeping constitution in work the civil administration could ask for the help of armed forces of the country. 6. Why Medha Patkar, Star Anand, and others were prevented from entering Nandigram and attacked by Cadres. If it was necessary for the administration to prevent them from entering Nandigram for the shake of law and order, was it not the duty of police? 7. Why media were muffled?These and many other unanswered questions indicate clearly the strategy of the CPIM to occupy the villages by their brute force and making this shows an example for other parts of the state. After the occupation of the entire region the people who earlier belonged to BUPC turned overnight the supporters of the CPIM. They let to die their true human existence in order to only keeping the body alive. The lands and the people were conquered. And now there is Peace and a new Dawn in Nandigram, according to the CPIM. Off course, there is peace but it is an erie peace and the dwan is the dawn of terror. They succeeded to secede the territory from India and to establish a reign of terror.When CRPF first came they could not entre Nandgram because till then the operation was incomplete and now CRPF entred there to maintain the status quo which means the erie peace of vanquished and riegn of terror of the occupiers.Mr. Buddhadeb, Mr. Biman Bose, Mr. Jyoti Bose, Mr. Karat and other comrades committed a grievous act of treason against the consitution of India.