More than 260 extrajudicial killings in Manipur in 11 months

More than 260 extrajudicial killings in Manipur in 11 months

A Press Release from Human Rights Alert (HRA), Imphal, forwarded by the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), says:

Independent Citizens Fact Finding Mission to Manipur, Imphal
Press Release

A team of concerned citizens comprising of Dr. K. S. Subramanian IPS, formerly of the Manipur-Tripura cadre and currently visiting professor, Jamia Millia University, New Delhi; Mr. Sumit Chakravartty, Editor, Mainstream; Ms. Kavita Srivastava, National Secretary People’s Union for Civil Loberties; and Ms. Vasundhara Jairath of Delhi Solidarity Group is on a fact finding mission in Manipur from November 5. The mission was undertaken in the wake of heightened tensions in the state since July 2009.

Mr. Prabhash Joshi, veteran Hindi journalist and a consistent voice against violation of human rights, who was to join the team on November 6 and had expressed grave concern over the situation in Manipur, asking his doctor to allow him to make this visit, passed away due to a cardiac arrest on the 5th night. We are shocked and saddened by this sudden loss. His undoubting commitment to justice, peace, and free speech shall continue to inspire everyone, particularly in the field of journalism.

Our Terms of References are:
- Visit and interact with families of those killed in alleged fake encounters;
- Take account of the number of people killed, arrested, tortured, detained, etc by forces;
- Interact with those in jail or those released after detention/arrest;
- Meet the Chief Minister, and other officials concerned with the law and order situation;
- Prepare a narrative and photo documentation of the visit;
- Compile a comprehensive report of the facts collected with analysis and recommendations and present it to all the stakeholders and national/regional media.

In the last three days in Manipur we have met a cross-section of people here, including the Chief Minister, Director General of Police, Inspector General - Human Rights and Prisons, members of the civil society, citizens' groups, academics, media persons and families of the victims of state violence.
At the meeting with the Chief Minister, in which the DGP was present, the general situation in the state was reviewed. The DGP confirmed that in the past 11 months over 260 people have been killed in the state. The DGP also asserted that all of them are underground activists.

When the committee expressed concern that more than a quarter of the prisoners in Manipur were detained under the National Security Act, and brought up the case of detained human rights defender, Mr. Jiten Yumnam, the DGP defended Jiten's detention and said he too was connected with the underground.

The Chief Minister said he was prepared for a second round of talks with those agitating over the 23rd July killings, after the first round on October 31. The Chief Minister said that several of their demands could not be met. Regarding the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, he said the matter rests with the Central government. The team members appealed to the government that in order to prevent further alienation of the citizens from the state, each killing must be properly investigated, the National Security Act cases reviewed and the family members of the deceased appropriately rehabilitated through a just rehabilitation policy. The team also raised the issue of Ms. Irom Sharmila Chanu's health, accommodation and access to the hospital.

On 6th November, the team was happy to meet Sharmila, now in the 10th year of her heroic hunger strike against the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958. The team calls upon the government to provide similar access to other civil society organizations to meet Sharmila. Her family members should be permitted to meet her on a regular basis. Being allowed only a limited number of visitors, she expressed her desire to meet, see and speak to more people more often. Her strength and courage in undertaking the longest satyagraha in the world, completely peaceful and non-violent, leaves us in awe of her struggle. Her demand for the repeal of the Act must be considered in the light of several official recommendations.

Since Ms. Mahashweta Devi was denied permission to meet her the previous day, Sharmila handed over a letter to the team members for the respected Magsaysay Award winner. She further expressed her concern over the number of innocent persons that were killed everyday in Manipur due to the high degree of violence in the state.

Through our discussions in Imphal, we have come across repeated allegations against the state security forces. The team expresses its deep concern over the deteriorating situation and the prevailing climate of impunity in Manipur. It conveys its solidarity with the victims of violence and calls for adequate recompense to the hapless women and children who have lost their husbands/fathers/sons and the only earning members of the families and to ensure employment opportunities to them.

Many have described the killings as fake encounters – murder of innocents who perished either in custody or otherwise, but without legal sanction. Each of these allegations must be investigated in a transparent manner and the guilty punished. Further, there have been charges of using preventive detention laws to curb citizens' democratic rights to protest and freely express their views. The high degree and the frequency of violation of human rights in the state is also cause for alarm. Restoration of peace and order must go hand in hand with the promotion of the rule of law and justice for the sustenance of democracy.

This is an interim report. The final report will follow. We hope to release the findings of the team on 18th November, 2009 in New Delhi.

The team feels that the consequences of continuing violence would be disastrous and will adversely affect peace building and reconciliation in society.

For further information, please contact: 
Mr. Babloo Loitongbom
Human Rights Alert
Imphal, Manipur
INDIA
Telephone: + 91 9862008838
Email: bloitongbam@gmail.com

74-yr-old Faizuddin beaten to death in his home by raiding police

74-yr-old Faizuddin beaten to death in his home by raiding police

By Waliullah Ahmed Laskar

Guwahati: In a brutal show of police power, the Assam Police mercilessly beat up Faizuddin Ahmed, an elderly respectable person of village Latakhat under Dhula police station in Darrang district of Assam, during a raid at his home on 11 July 2009. Ahmed succumbed to the assault and died on the spot.

As done by other co-accused, the 74-year-old man did not go into hiding when a police team barged into his house at about 10 pm purportedly in search of three persons including him accused in a case. The family members of the deceased state that when they insisted that he should avoid the police and answer the charge against him in the court he maintained that there was no need to go into hiding as he was innocent.

The case against him and two other persons was false and filed maliciously because he tried to intervene in a dispute involving his co-villagers to settle it amicably, say some local people. One of the parties to the dispute was not happy with him and they filed a false case against him. It is this case in connection with which the police raided his house.

According to the sources, the raiding police team demanded ten thousand rupees from him because he made them to visit his house in the night as there is a case against him. If there was no case they would not have to toil so much. It is he who is responsible for accusations against him and he had to pay for it, the policemen allegedly said. The elderly person pleaded his innocence repeatedly and told them that if they insist he could only pay them rupees two thousand. At this offer the men in uniform got infuriated and started to beat him, sources claim. The aged fragile body could not withstand the brutal assaults and succumbed at the spot.

According to the reports, the local people assembled at Faizuddin's house and gheraoed the police team, immediately after the incident. They demanded exemplary punishment against the guilty police officers.

A case has been registered against the raiding police personnel in Dhula police station bearing No. 157/2009 and the Superintendent of Police for Darrang district Imdadul Hussain ordered to arrest the Sub-Inspector who led the erring team.

The people are shocked at the incident and demanding prompt trial and exemplary punishment for the ‘killer officers.’

http://www.twocircles.net/2009jul13/74_yr_old_faizuddin_beaten_death_his_home_raiding_police.html 

Appeal regarding Extra-Judicial Killing of Four Persons in Imphal East District of Manipur

Name of victims:
1. Mr. Mohammad Qudur Ali, aged 22 years, son of Mr. Mohammad Hayat Ali, residing at Urup Makha Leikai, Imphal East district, Manipur
2. Mr. Naorem Boinao, aged 23 years, residing at Kakwa Naorem Leikai, Imphal East district, Manipur
3. Mr. Santhosh Pradhan, aged 26 years, residing at Manthripukhri, Imphal East district, Manipur
4. Mr. Khaidem Boker, aged 27 years, residing at Kakwa Huidrom Leikai, Imphal East district, Manipur

Name of alleged perpetrators: Police officers attached to Manipur State Police Commando Unit

Date of incident: 7 February 2008

Place of incident: Imphal East district, Manipur

Barak Human Rights Protection Committee (BHRPC) voices its concern regarding the case of the murder of the four persons named above. BHRPC has been informed that all of them were taken into custody by the state police commando unit in two different incidents and were later found dead on the same day evening.

In the case of Mr. Mohammad Ali, Ali was arrested from a queue while he was waiting for his turn to obtain an election identity card in front of the Deputy Commissioner's office. Whereas in the case of the other three victims they were taken into custody from various places within Imphal East district, without reason attributed for their arrest. Hours after arrest the bodies of the victims were found abandoned in suspicious circumstances within the district, of which Ali's body was found near the place where he was taken into custody. All the four victims have gunshot injuries on their body. The police has accused that the victims were related to anti-national forces active in the region and that they were all murdered while they tried to escape.

The manner of arrest and the circumstances in which their dead bodies were found suggests that the state police commando unit has in fact murdered persons on mere suspicion, which is an offense in law in India.

BHRPC has been informed that a Joint Action Committee (JAC) has been formed to protest against the murders and that the state Chief Minister has agreed to order an enquiry into the incident. It is highly suspicious that four persons arrested from different places in the state under diverse circumstances were all found dead hours after their arrest. It is equally unbelievable that they all tried to escape from the custody soon after arrest.

I therefore request you to ensure that:

1. the enquiry ordered into the cases are conducted impartially;

2. the witnesses in all the four cases are given adequate protection;

3. the police officers responsible for the incidents and their immediate commanding officers are kept under suspension until a civilian court decides the matter;

4. the state government pays an ex-gratia payment to the relatives of the victims, and;

5. the progress of the enquiry and investigation in this case is periodically released in the form of press releases by the state government.

For details visit: http://bhrpc.net.googlepages.com/

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.

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.

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.