Sitalkuchi firing: CISF personnel dodge CID questioning repeatedly

CID Image Courtesy:indiatoday.in

The Crime Investigation Department (CID) of the West Bengal Police submitted an interim report before the Calcutta High Court on Thursday and revealed how six personnel of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) have been repeatedly dodging questioning. The HC had asked the CID to file a report on progress in the investigations in connection with a PIL seeking an independent probe in the matter.

On November 11, the district detective inspector of Cooch Behar submitted the report to a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice R Bharadwaj. He submitted that though they were served notice four times, the CISF personnel refused to appear in person, requesting instead to appear virtually in light of the pandemic situation. However, there is no provision for virtual questioning as per law.

Brief background of the case

The matter refers to an incident that took place on April 10, 2021, during Phase 4 of the Assembly elections in Bengal when four people were killed when paramilitary forced opened fire at polling booth number 126 in Amtali, in Sitalkuchi in Cooch Behar district of West Bengal.

Trouble began when Mrinal Haque, a 15-year-old boy was discovered badly beaten up by some people. The boy, a resident of Jorpatki village claims he was thrashed brutally by a central force jawan. The boy claimed he was beaten by central force jawans when he had gone to the local market.

Haque’s home is less than 100 meters from the Amtali Madhyamik Siksha Kendra near polling booth number 126. The place where the boy was beaten is also very close to the polling booth number 126, and when villagers gathered in protest, personnel of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) allegedly opened fire.

The people who were killed in firing were identified as: Noor Alam Mian (20), Manirujjaman Mian (25), Samiul Haque (21) and Hamidul Mian (31).

CISF personnel repeatedly dodge questioning

The CID took over the case in May and called six CIF personnel for questioning, but they did not comply with the request. Even as late as August 2021, the CISF personnel sought an extension for appearing before the CID. In September, a Cooch Behar court had to intervene and direct that the six CISF personnel present themselves for questioning by November 16.

As of November 11, the men were yet to appear for questioning. The question is how do they feel empowered to act with such impunity despite legal notices and even a court order? It is clear that the CISF personnel in question enjoy the patronage of people capable of sheltering them from prosecution.

Role of central forces during Assembly elections

It is noteworthy that throughout the assembly elections, there were several allegations against central forces including CISF, CRPF, CAPF etc., of acting at the behest of the regime at the Centre. During the second phase of the Assembly elections, the Trinamool Congress had alleged that CRPF personnel were trying to intimidate and influence voters in Nandigram, the constituency from where Mamata Banerjee originally contested elections and lost to Suvendu Adhikari by a narrow margin amidst huge controversy. The Election Commission website, from early afternoon to late evening, showed Suvendu Adhikari had won with a margin of over 9,000 votes. But at 8:50 P.M the Election Commission website suddenly showed that Mamata Banerjee was ahead by 1,453 votes. Then late at night the results were declared and Adhikari was shown to have won by 1,956 votes.

During phase three of the elections, it had become clear that these central force personnel were being sheltered. For example, when a Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) jawan was accused of molesting a minor girl in Hooghly district, he was not arrested and in fact was allowed to serve on election duty the following day. This lack of action prompted the West Bengal Commission for Protection of Child Rights (WBCPCR) to write to the state Election Commission asking that immediate steps be taken against him. The child rights body asked that the case be investigated under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.