Image Courtesy:timesofindia.indiatimes.com

The Delhi State Committee of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), has written to UttarPradesh, Chief Minister Adityanath, on the alleged “encounter” by the Loni police in Ghaziabad district on November 11, 2021. They have put on record for the CM the events of the reported ‘encounter’ where each of the seven men have “identical uniform injuries” below the knee.

The committee has called this an act of “shocking police atrocity” adding that the police SHO was only suspended after he “publicly objected to his transfer”. The CPI(M) Committee has stated that it is “extremely unjust that without any independent inquiry, false cases have been foisted on the seven men and they have been locked up in jail,” and have called for an independent inquiry under judicial scrutiny.

The Committee has also demanded that “a case of attempt to murder and other relevant sections should be levied on the SHO and he should be arrested and prosecuted”. The letter recalled that even the local MLA Nandkishore Gurjar made “a series of highly objectionable statements with the intent of creating communal disharmony and enmity between communities.” They have called him a “serial offender in this regard” and demanded that cases be filed against him under the relevant provisions of the IPC.

It is important to note that the injured men are all Muslims. The letter highlights that this “substantiates the apprehension of many citizens in the area that they have been targeted because of their religious identity. They are all daily wage workers in the unorganised sector, taking whatever work is available. Many of them have been doing manual labour as loaders, some as street vendors, as construction workers and so on. They also all belong to the Rangrez caste and traditionally their profession has been as dyers. At present they were hired as workers to clean drums with chemicals and also to separate waste material.”

A delegation of CPI(M) members, Brinda Karat, K.M.Tewari, Sehba Farooqui, Asha Sharma, Aman Saini met the families along with local leaders. They were informed by the families “that their feet had been affected by the chemicals used to wash the drums” adding that “they have never been remotely connected with the cattle trade leave alone slaughtering cattle.” It added that “it seems that they have been made a scapegoat in a more sinister plan to create communal tension and disharmony in the area as a default electoral strategy.” Those with the gunshot injuries require proper treatment now and according to the committee the “the facilities in the jail are not adequate.” Their families are also too poor to afford lawyers, and do not have copies of the FIRs or know what charges have been filed against their sons, noted the committee members, adding that the men now in jail were the main earning members, and now their  families are also in “a financially desperate situation.”

The committee has asked that “pending the inquiry which if impartial will no doubt find the police guilty and the victims innocent, the Government should release the victims on bail without delay.”

Uttar Pradesh Police were forced to order a probe after Loni Police Station SHO Rajendra Tyagi, was transferred. He reportedly wrote a note in the General Diary saying he was being targeted due to the “encounter”. The “encounter” survivors, Shoaib, Mustakeen, Salman, Monu, Intezar, Nazim and another youth, who is a minor according to his family, are in judicial custody, and according to news reports had identical injuries, a few inches below the knee. The Ghaziabad police had told the media that these men had been injured after an “encounter” operation, led by Tyagi, and were accused of being involved in “cow slaughter”.

The “encounter” reportedly took place at 6.10 am on November 11 near a scrap godown that was raided in Baheta Hajipur of Loni, reported Indian Express. It was after the identical injuries on the men ‘nabbed’ were reported that questions were asked. Initially, Loni Police Station SHO Rajendra Tyagi, who led the “operation”, was transferred. However he raised a noise about the transfer. The police had made a media statement on November 11, that they “acted on a tip-off regarding cow slaughter, and that the accused fired seven rounds, and they returned fire 13 times, hitting all the accused in the leg.” The police also claimed to have recovered “three animal carcasses, seven country-made pistols, two axes, five knives, and two bundles of plastic wire from the accused.” 

Why was Inspector Tyagi transferred?

Ghaziabad SSP Pawan Kumar told the media the encounter was being probed following the police officer’s “misconduct” adding that the Inspector was suspended for “violating the Official Secrets Act” as “The entry that was made in the official document was unauthorised. Secondly, this secret document was leaked. The policeman also went on leave that had not been sanctioned.” 

Inspector Tyagi, was served transfer orders to the Indirapuram Police Station on November 12. His note as quoted by IE said, “On November 11, my team and I arrested seven persons for cow slaughtering after they were shot in the leg. We recovered carcasses of cows and a vehicle. Since I handled the operations, I believe I have been transferred for this reason. This has dented my morale. I am not in a state to work and I have never been accused of something like this… My character is of the highest standard. Before transferring me, this incident should have been probed.”

Tyagi meanwhile, has been supported by Bharatiya Janata Party’s Loni MLA Nand Kishor Gurjar. He accused police of receiving money from cow smugglers, and transferring the Inspector, “Police have taken lakhs of rupees from the cow smugglers. The SHO wanted to name the main accused but he wasn’t allowed to. He tried to take action against cow slaughter and was punished,” reported IE.

Ironically, social media recalled that Tyagi when he was as SHO of Kharkauda Police Station in Meerut, in 2018, had held himself responsible for a cow-slaughter incident in his jurisdiction, even then he had put this in a note in the General Diary.

Meerut:Kharkhoda SHO Rajendra Tyagi filed complaint against himself & others in General Diary at police station after incidents of cow smuggling took place in his jurisdiction.SHO says,’I had introduced a concept that cop will be responsible if action isn’t taken against a crime’ pic.twitter.com/D0wymMlc95

— ANI UP (@ANINewsUP) July 15, 2018

Who is Nandkishore Gurjar?

In February he was accused by farmers of trying to break up the Ghazipur protest, which he denied and claimed that it was not even a farmer-led protest. He had also called the protesting “farmers” asking police to “shoot them” saying “his own people were ready to beat them with shoes”. 

‘जो किसान बैठे हैं ,वो सौ फीसदी आतंकवादी हैं , पुलिस उनको शूट करे , अगर वो नहीं भागते तो हमारे लोग जूते मारकर भगाने को तैयार हैं ‘

मोदी जी और योगी जी के सिपाही बीजेपी विद्यालय नंद किशोर गुर्जर का बयान https://t.co/iGy6SP3z9x pic.twitter.com/NNHT7BQKYq

— Ajit Anjum (@ajitanjum) February 1, 2021

In 2020, he was among the first political leaders to have demanded that meat sellers be forced to down their shop’s shutters during Navratri. He had also claimed his area was under an aircraft fly path and ‘bones’ etc were dangerous as they could lure birds to circle and threaten bird hits and a potential aircraft crash. He has since then been projecting himself as a Hindutva leader in his constituency.

Related:

Noida hate crime survivor approaches SC seeking fair investigation
Krishna Janmabhoomi: Application before DM to stop namaaz at Shahi Idgah
UP ASHAs have had enough of empty election promises

The post An ‘encounter’ in UP: Identical injuries, allegations of ‘cow slaughter’, Muslim daily wagers in jail? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Justice Deepak Gupta, an esteemed and well-respected former Judge of the Supreme Court who recently retired spoke to Arfa Khanum Sherwani of The Wire, whereby he commented on the recent Vikas Dubey encounter which raised eyebrows in the legal community. Aside from the fact that Dubey was a gangster who was charged with several offences of murders, kidnapping and extortion in the last two decades, his elimination by encounter is seemingly an abuse of rule of law.

While speaking to Sherwani he pointed out how, after he allegedly killed 8 police personnel in a shoot out and absconded, the police went and vandalised and destroyed Dubey’s house. He pointed out how from the beginning itself the police refused to follow the law, “there is no procedure prescribed for destroying the house”. He also questioned why this was done knowing that a lot of evidence would be wiped out, “I mean there is a lot of conjecture – was it done to protect other people? Was it done to protect the truth from coming out?”

He further went on to explore the reason behind the encounter, “I really don’t have any answers to why he was killed. But police made up such a shoddy story, it seems they don’t even give a damn whether people think that we killed him or not”.

While he did place reliance on the future findings of the investigation panel or a committee to find out whether this was really an encounter or whether it was staged, he said, “indications are that this was not an encounter, he did not run away, he was killed.”

Expressing concern over how the encounter, rather the extra-judicial killing, was not condemned by any person of authority he said, “what worries me most, it’s not the fact that he has been brutally.. I mean the law has not been followed, but what worries me even more is that a lot of people holding positions in power have not only not condemned the incident but have sort of supported the incident by saying, ‘so what, he was a murderer, he murdered a policeman, so what?’”

About the role of the NHRC

When asked why the courts have been silent, why no suo moto cognizance was taken and why the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has also been quiet, he mentioned that since the petitions have already come to the Supreme Court, the question of suo moto does not arise, as it is not necessary but about the NHRC he said, “As far as the NHRC is concerned, I think no action has been take and I am sorry to say that I do feel that the NHRC was a body meant to protect human rights. It was a body created for the protection of human rights of the citizens. Yes, it does not have any adjudicatory powers, its powers are more recommendatory in nature, but somewhere down the line, the NHRC has now become almost as if it will not do anything. That’s my feeling.”

He further said that NHRC can even go to courts if it feels it has limited powers to handle a particular case, and ask the court to take appropriate action. He said that the NHRC “is not working to the extent we expected it to work for the protection of human rights”.

Why does a criminal deserve fair trial?

Arfa asked a very pertinent question that a majority of people, who have attributed legitimacy to the encounter have asked, as to why does a person with a history of crimes, including charges of a half a dozen murders on him deserve a fair trial in courts. Justice Gupta, who became a lawyer in 1978, said that back then he had taken an oath to uphold the Constitution. He read out the Article 21 from the Indian Constitution and said, “an encounter is not a procedure established by law. Killing by the police- if it is a killing. I am qualifying my word, that will have to come out later- but it’s not a procedure established by law.” He said it is illegal by itself and when we turn a blind eye to such an action we are doing a disservice to the nation and a disservice to the constitution.

He further said that there is no place for encounters in a civilised nation and most importantly, a country governed by rule of law.

He also pointed out and was proud of how Ajmal Kasab, who was a terrorist charged with killing hordes of people in an unprecedented terrorist attack in the city of Mumbai, was also given a fair trial, and he was hanged only after a trial that followed due procedure. He said, in this case as well the police could have pleaded for a special court or any other measure could have been taken to ensure speedy trial.

Speaking of the misuse of power that is blatantly apparent when such encounters take place he said that the police have always had the power and no matter what political party is in power, they will exercise control over the police and that will always remain. He pointed out how Supreme Court judgments, law commission recommendations etc have not been followed, police reforms are not in place, police are not trained.

He said, police are not bad but they “don’t regard brutality as something which is abhorrent to rights. They feel it’s a part of the game”.

When asked about whether encounters are celebrated because of long drawn legal proceedings which take years to culminate, he agreed that judicial proceedings take time but that can be mitigated only with the help of the government as the judiciary only gets allocated 0.57% out of the budget.

He also said that while the slow judicial process could be one reason but the portrayal and glorification of police taking law in their own hands in movies also has an impact on this perception that quick justice is desirable.

Speaking about custodial crimes he said that when a person accused of serious crimes is denied bail by due process of law, it is necessary to ensure that his rights are not infringed upon while he is in custody since our criminal jurisprudence follows the principle that every man is innocent until proven guilty.

He further said it needs to be established in young minds and people in general that rule of law is the basis of a democracy. He said what worries him more than the killing of Vikas Dubey is the flouting of the law. “we have to send a message as a society that the law must be followed. Even if the person is the most heinous criminal, the legal system cannot be hijacked either by the police or anybody else. Today it’s the police which has done it and hence there is a little element of justice. But tomorrow it could be a mob doing it,” he said.

He further said that most of the encounter cases get closed because the investigation is by the police themselves; there needs to be investigation by an independent agency or an independent committee.

About the impartiality and real independence of the judiciary he said that judiciary is not compromised but “there may some black sheep”.

All in all, he expressed his dismay over extra judicial killings and emphasized on the need to believe and have faith in the rule of law and the judiciary in which every citizen has a part to play.

The complete video can be viewed here.

Related:

India’s dark history of custodial abuse
Madras HC orders Judicial Magistrate to conduct inquiry into alleged custodial deaths in Tuticorin
NAPM condemns the alleged custodial torture and death of Jayaraj and Bennicks by TN police

The post “No place for encounter in a country governed by rule of law”: Justice Deepak Gupta appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The encounter took place allegedly in a cross fire between the accused and the police, when the police had taken the accused to the crime scene at 3 a.m. on December 6 for re-construction of the crime as part of investigation. The first response in terms of inquiry, came from the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) which issued a press release on the same day informing that it has taken suo moto cognizance of the case.  

The Commission is of the opinion that this matter is required to be probed very carefully. Accordingly, it has asked its Director General (Investigation) to immediately send a team for a fact finding on the spot investigation into the matter. The team of the Investigation Division of the Commission headed by an SSP, was reportedly deployed immediately. The Commission said that the increasing number of cases of rapes and sexual assault on women across the country has forced it for intervene into this matter.

The Commission also noted that, “Death of four persons in alleged encounter with the police personnel when they were in their custody, is a matter of concern for the Commission. The Commission is aware that growing incidents of sexual assault and violence against the women has created an atmosphere of fear and anger amongst the public at large but loss of human lives even of a person arrested by the police under law, in such circumstances, would definitely give a wrong message to the society.”

A very pertinent point made by the Commission, which the larger public who is celebrating the Hyderabad police as heroes is that, “If, the arrested persons were actually guilty, they were to be punished as per law pursuant to the directions of the competent court”. The Commission also stated that there is lack of Standard Operating Procedure to immediately respond to panic situations by police and the Commission has time and again insisted upon law enforcement agencies to keep human rights angle in their view while dealing with the persons arrested by them or being kept in their custody.

Civil Society

Further, a petition was also filed by Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) and People’s Watch, both non-profit organizations seeking independent panel of autopsy surgeons to conduct post-mortem of the four accused deceased in extra-judicial killing by the police. The petition pleaded the Commission to monitor to ensure that the PUCL guidelines are being followed and send its own observer to elicit on the ground facts surrounding the encounter. The petition also sought the Commission’s intervention by directing DGP of Telangana to pass necessary orders to preserve bodies of the accused, to direct a special autopsy team from other states to undertake autopsy on videography, to direct the Commission’s investigation team to examine the FIR, diary entry of the police station, wireless logbook record of the police station and on of vehicles used by police officers engaged in the encounter of that day, call data records of mobile phones of those police officers and to retain and preserve all kinds of essential evidentiary material related to the case.

Telangana High Court

In a positive turn of events, even the judiciary has taken note of the incident and the Telangana High Court directed that the videographed autopsy of the 4 accused be handed over to District judge of Mahboobnagar in a CD or pen drive who will then hand it over to the Registrar General of the High Court. The bench also directed to preserve the dead bodies till December 9, which is the next hearing date.

Supreme Court

A petition has also been filed before the Supreme Court by Advocate GS Mani and another, demanding probe by CBI (Central bureau of Investigation) or SIT (Special Investigation Team) or CID (Crime Investigation Department) against Cyberabad Commissioner of Police and others involved. The petition has urged the apex court to call for records of the case and direct inquiry as per the guidelines laid out in the PUCL vs. State of Maharashtra in 2014 which was about 90 encounter killings by Mumbai police between 1995 and 1997.

Lawyers respond

Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde told Live Law, “This appears to be an extra-judicial execution which is totally illegal. I will not even call it an encounter… Those who cheer and encourage such executions, may do well to recognize, that destruction of the rule of law, and descent into a police state, is not what this country is about.”

The post Hyderabad police ‘encounters’ intervention from NHRC, HC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Taking note of the Fact-Finding Report by human rights defenders (Bela Bhatia, Soni Sori, Madkam Hidme and Lingaram Kodopi), reports in the media and the demands by various political and social organizations, the Chhattisgarh PUCL has demanded that the state government immediately announces an independent probe by a retired Judge of the High Court into the deaths of Podiya Sori and Lachhu Mandavi in the so-called encounter on the night of 13th September 2019. 
 
Furthermore, PUCL is appalled that the Dantewada police has lodged an FIR against the activists, sarpanches of Dantewada, as well as the 150-200 unnamed tribal villagers, who were merely registering the complaint of an extra-judicial killing and engaged in a peaceful protest against this injustice, and condemns this police action as retributive action meant to intimidate those speaking up for Adivasi rights.
 
It is well established that Podiya Sori and Lachu Mandavi were young and respected leaders from village Gumiyapal in Dantewada district who had been active in the popular movement against the plans of the mining giant Adani Group to start iron-ore mining operations in Nandaraj mountain in Kirandul, which is held sacred by the tribals in the region.  Recently, there had been widespread protests against the fraudulent No-Objection Certificate (NOC) obtained from the Gram Sabha of the affected village, and a magisterial inquiry had been instituted to investigate the matter. However, on 13th September 2019, both were killed by the security forces in their village and declared as Naxalite commanders, carrying rewards of Rs 5 lakhs each for information leading to their capture.
 
Moreover, villagers have claimed that neither was involved with the underground Maoist movement, and deny the police allegations that they were killed in a firefight with the security forces. As told to the Fact-Finding Team consisting of human rights defenders, social activists and media persons (Bela Bhatia, Soni Sori, Linga Kodopi and Hidme Madkam) the village folks clearly stated that on the night of 13th September 2019, the duo along with three other youth had congregated in the school premises for some light-hearted entertainment.  At around 9 pm that night, when Podiya had already left the school premises to sleep at a friend’s place, the security forces appeared, and rounded up the youth in the school and dragged Podiya from his friend’s house. The five, including Podiya and Lachhu, were slapped and beaten and forcibly taken away by the security forces.  En route, two of the men managed to escape and return to their families. The next morning, the villagers learned that Podiya and Lachhu had been killed and shown as dreaded Naxalites, and the fifth youth, Ajay Telam, continued to be in police custody.
 
With this information, in the evening of the September 16,  advocate and researcher Bela Bhatia, and the AAP leader Soni Sori, along with two tribal women activists, Hidme Madkam and Pande Kunjami went to the Kirandul Police Station. Hundreds of villagers who had walked to the police station from their villages in a rally in protest against this injustice were also sitting peacefully in a demonstration in front of the police station.  The police complaint and the peaceful demonstration by adivasis villagers was to raise a voice against this extra-judicial killing of two young men, and to inquire about the whereabouts of the third. However, none of them were allowed to even enter the police station and the complaint itself was accepted only through the closed bars of the police station gate.  The next day too, when the team returned to follow up on their complaint, the SDOP of Kirandul was loud and accusatory, insinuating that they had rounded up the villagers and the protest was “stage managed”.

The statement issued by PUCL also states that it is ironic that while the complaint of these activists against the police was never registered as an FIR, they themselves were accused of violating the Model Code of Conduct and an FIR 62/2019 of PS Kirandul was registered against Bela Bhatia, Soni Sori, Sarpanch Nanda, Sarpanch’s pati Bhima and 150-200 other villagers u/s 188 of the IPC.

 The Chhattisgarh unit of the PUCL has also expressed its dismay at this “retributive behavior of the Dantewada police and the fact that despite the promises of the Baghel government, little seems to have changed on the ground.  The false encounters continue and innocent Adivasis, standing up for their rights, continue to be labelled as Naxalites and killed in cold blood by security forces. Human rights activists peacefully asking for police accountability and transparency continue to be persecuted by draconian and illegal measures of the authorities.”
 
Further the statement also records that the civil liberties platform has demanded an independent inquiry by a retired judge of the High Court be ordered to probe the murders of Podiya Sori and Lachhu Mandavi of Gumiyapal village and the “illegal detention” of Ajay Telam (who has since been released); and that the police immediately send a closure report for FIR no. 62/2019 of Police Station Kirandul against Bela Bhatia, Soni Sori, and other villagers to the concerned magistrate and stop persecution of human rights activists.
 
The statement has been issued by Degree Prasad Chouhan, president, PUCL, Chhattisgarh and Shalini Gera, secretary, PUCL, Chhattisgarh
 

The post Independent Judicial Probe into “encounter” of anti-mining activists needed: PUCL appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for an intervenor, asked the Court to seek a status report from the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), that has investigated some of the deaths, the Deccan Herald reported. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, said that the government had abided by the mandate issued by the Supreme Court in the case ‘PUCL Vs State of Maharashtra’ regarding police encounters, the Herald said, noting that Rohatgi said that a post-mortem was conducted, an inquiry was opened and no complaint was filed with the district court. Rohatgi said that those who were killed had faced multiple criminal charges.

On Friday, January 11, a statement from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) said that four UN Special Rapporteurs expressed alarm over at allegations that police have carried out at least 59 extrajudicial killings in Uttar Pradesh since March 2017. The experts in question are Agnes Callamard, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Michel Forst, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, Nils Melzer, Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, and Ahmed Shaheed, Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion and belief.

The statement said that the human rights experts had submitted detailed information on 15 cases to the Indian government, most involving individuals from Muslim communities living in poverty. “Evidence indicates the killings took place in police custody. In all of the cases, the police said the killings were during encounters and in self-defence,” the statement noted.

“We are extremely concerned about the pattern of events: individuals allegedly being abducted or arrested before their killing, and their bodies bearing injuries indicative of torture,” the experts said, adding, “We have also received allegations of corruption including the police demanding money to release the victim prior to the killing”. They said, “Unfortunately we are continuing to receive reports of other similar cases of killings as well as threats and harassment”.

The experts also expressed concern that the Supreme Court’s guidelines have not been followed, including the police not notifying families of the killings, not examining the scene, not providing post-mortem reports to families, and not transferring cases to an independent investigative body. They also highlighted reports that victims’ family members and human rights defenders working on the matter have been targets of harassment, death threats, and false criminal cases in apparent efforts to intimidate them, the statement said. The Special Rapporteurs also mentioned remarks made by high-ranking state government and police officials “seeming to incite, justify or sanction killings,” the statement said. The experts have called for an immediate review into the use of force by the Uttar Pradesh Police “to ensure all law enforcement operations were conducted in compliance with international standards,” and for immediate, independent and thorough investigations into the alleged killings, and for perpetrators to be prosecuted. The stressed that victims’ family members and human rights defenders must be protected, and that actions targeting them must be probed.

In July 2018, the Supreme Court issued a notice to the Uttar Pradesh government over a petition that alleged that multiple fake encounters had been conducted in the state. The NHRC also issued a notice to the UP government in November 2018. In 2017, the Uttar Pradesh Police said that within six months of UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s government, there were 420 encounters in which 15 people were killed. By 2018, the state’s police had carried out 1,038 encounters in which 32 people were killed, The Wire reported, noting that in July 2018 the OHCHR also wrote to the Indian government calling for investigations into alleged “fake encounter” killings in Manipur.

In February 2018, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) took note of the “encounter spree” in Uttar Pradesh, speculating that the state government “flaunted” the incidents to show it was ‘hard on crime’ to attract investors.

The post Supreme Court to hold detailed hearing over police encounters in UP next month appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 

The post Aligarh Encounter Victims’ Families, Mostly Women, Forced to Live in a Tent appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As we debate Vivek Tiwari’s cold-blooded murder, my mind goes to a cold wintry morning at the height of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement when some two dozen policemen stormed our Muslim-dominated neighbourhood in Lucknow around 6 am to arrest a man suspected of rioting and arson.

Faced with resistance, the cops, including PAC personnel, clambered on the top floor of a nearby school building and then, shouting Jai Shri Ram, opened unprovoked fire at the homes below.

Within minutes, four were dead and many injured. All men died in their homes. One of them was a friend who had got married weeks before.

His brain was blown to smithereens by a .303 bullet as he stumbled out of bed, half asleep and opened his bedroom window to look out.

When the guns fell silent, the cops broke into several homes and rounded any young man they could get their hands on.

Shaukat, the blind muezzin of our mosque, was dragged out on the street and shot in the palm of his hand by a service revolver in full public view. Media reports on the following day said he was injured after a crude bomb exploded in his hand. A blind man throwing bombs? I found it funny even under those critical circumstances.

The police also gate crashed into my uncle’s house, a mere 200 meters from my own place and whisked away two of my cousins to the Aminabad police station where they were beaten mercilessly all day and forced to chant Jai Shri Raam.

“Katve, yeh lo Javed Miandad Ka chakka,” the cops jeered as they rained lathi blows on my cousins, who had been arrested because they were dressed in shalwar kameez.

Another young cousin, who lived in the same house was spared because he had the presence of mind to hurriedly pullover over a pair of jeans.

Later that evening, some us visited the police station carrying warm clothes and blankets for our cousins who were still in illegal custody and shivering in cold.

As we handed over the blankets, a police inspector sized us up and asked: “Saaley Katve, bhainsa khaatey ho, phir bhi sardi lag rahi hai?

I was not at home when the police firing started that morning. My Dad and I had gone to the nearby Charbagh Railway station to pick my uncle and cousin who were coming back from Delhi.

And since there were no cellphones during those days, we remained blissfully unaware of the carnage until we drove back towards our home.

We had no clue even when a posse of policemen who had set up a barricade in the middle of the LaTouche road stopped us and asked us to step out. As we revealed our names, the policemen started raining lathi blows on the four of us.

We were all well dressed, and by no accounts, looked criminals. My dad showed them railway tickets, saying we had merely gone to pick our relatives. But the explanation cut no ice.

The beat us mercilessly. One enthusiastic cop even cocked a gun at us. Luckily he didn’t pull the trigger else I would have also ended up as Vivek Tiwari.

(The write up has been taken from Mazhar Farooqui’s Facebook wall).
 

The post Vivek Tiwari’s murder a cold reminder of the trigger-happy nature of UP Police appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image Courtesy: NDTV
 
Kolkata: Bengal BJP president Dilip Ghosh is spewing more hatred than before. His hate speeches become more bizarre by the day with the most recent comment on encounters, otherwise known as extra-judicial killings, being used as a government tool to maintain peace.
 
Last Wednesday, on June 20, while addressing party workers in Jalpaiguri district in North Bengal, Ghosh said, “A lot of TMC leaders are flexing muscles and threatening our workers. Either they will go to jail or there will be direct encounters. We are counting the bullets which killed our workers. Just like the way Gabbar Singh said kitni goliya hain (how many bullets are there), the day will soon come when we will count the bullets as well as the bodies. No Kesto or Bistu will be able to save them. We have not signed a bond where it is written that we will offer them Rasgulla if they beat us up,” reported The Indian Express.
 
The report added that the party on Saturday organised a District Magistrate office gherao programme in Jalpaiguri district as part of its state-wide movement to protest against the alleged killing of its workers in Purulia district.
 
In an interview to NDTV recently, he said that encounters are a necessary tool of governance used by all governments to save society. “For the sake of peace, whenever it is necessary, it is the government’s responsibility to hold encounters,” Dilip Ghosh told NDTV to explain his recent encounter threat to Trinamool Congress leaders. “All governments do it in their states, from Uttar Pradesh to Bengal. Uttar Pradesh is the champion,” he said.
 
“Ghosh also credited Yogi Adityanath government with being “upfront” about its controversial use of police encounters to curb crime. Questions have been raised about the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister nudging the police to kill criminals in encounters, a term often used to describe extra-judicial killings by the state. But Yogi Adityanath has defended the police shooting “criminals” and called opposition leaders, who questioned the killings by the police, their sympathisers,” NDTV reported.
 
“We will think about it (encounter policy) when we form the government. As of now, we are only talking about it,” he said, contending that when he spoke about encounters, he did not imply that his party workers would come out on the streets with weapons. It was just a reference to the police doing its job. The way, he said, Yogi Adityanath government was doing in Uttar Pradesh and Mamata Banerjee government in West Bengal. Asked if he had the approval of the party bosses for this encounter policy, Mr Ghosh said he didn’t need anyone’s approval,” the report added.
 
The BJP leader also claimed that Mamata Banerjee government too had killed Maoist leader Kishenji in 2011 in an extra-judicial killing. “He was picked up from one place and killed elsewhere by security forces. What was it? It was an encounter and was considered justified by the government,” Ghosh said. “In Bengal, Siddhartha Shankar Roy killed several naxals in encounters because he did not have an option. The CPM killed Maoists… and Mamata Banerjee (government) is also killing people by encounter. So if it is required for peace, it is the responsibility of the government,” Ghosh said in the report.
 
The police has filed a case against him for the threat.
 
Ghosh and his hatred for TMC
On Monday he said that he would “set the bed linen of Trinamul leaders on fire.” He said it days before national chief Amit Shah’s arrival and was seen as a sign of the aggressive strategy that will be used against the Mamata Banerjee government.
 
“I will not allow Trinamul leaders to live in peace and enjoy the wealth they have acquired at the cost of nine crore people’s (the state’s population) mental peace. I will enter their homes and set their bed linen on fire,” Ghosh said at a BJP sit-in below the Gandhi statue on Mayo Road to protest alleged “atrocities” on BJP workers since last month’s rural polls,” a report in The Telegraph stated. “Only tit-for-tat politics works in Didi’s Bengal,” Ghosh said on Monday.
 
“A source in the BJP said Ghosh was once asked to mind his language by central leaders. “But he is carrying on with the abuses and threats, that too just two days before party president Amit Shah’s arrival in Bengal. It is clear such aggression will become the mainstay of our politics in the state,” said a BJP insider critical of the approach,” the report added.
 
He also said that an “unofficial emergency” has been imposed in Bengal under the TMC rule and democratic rights are being snatched away from the masses. Ghosh claimed several top leaders of TMC are in touch with the party leadership and are willing to join BJP.
 
A report by Firstpost said, “The democratic rights of the masses have been snatched away. The people are not allowed to vote freely and fairly in the last panchayat elections. An unofficial emergency has been imposed in the state,” Ghosh said while addressing a rally. He also accused the TMC government of trying to “wipe out” every sign of opposition in the state.
 
On June 1, he had threatened the police. “Police is working for the ruling party. I warn them to stay cautioned. Nobody knows what will happen to Didi in three years (2021 Assembly election)…whether she will be in Nabanna (state secretariat) or she would be cooking in Kalighat (her residence.) We can remove their uniforms if needed,” he said. The BJP has been questioning the role of the police since the panchayat elections,” reported the New Indian Express.
 

The post Bengal BJP president calls encounter killings ‘governance tools’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

‘Encounter’ attacks that are being unleashed on people in the name of fighting crimes have emerged as one of the most chilling aspects of the Yogi Raj (Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath rule) in Uttar Pradesh. The police have conducted – according to the state government’s figures till January this year – 1,038 ‘encounters’, killing a total of 44 people and leaving 238 injured. Four policemen also died in the ongoing killing spree in the state.

However, the unofficial figures are much higher, where the total number of shootouts are estimated to be over 1,400 so far. These ‘encounters entail shooting at people, who may or may not be criminals or gangsters, without “following due process of law”.

From the National Police Commission (1979) to the National Human Rights Commission – NHRC (2003) and the Supreme Court judgment in the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL – a human and civil rights defender) case in 2014 have clearly mandated against such killing of people.

The testimonies of eyewitnesses and family members of those who were killed in the ‘encounters’ and a close examination of the FIRs and postmortem reports clearly show that most of these killings  are cold blooded murders – where no gun battle apparently took place.

For many of those killed or injured, it appears that the police posthumously inserted clauses of criminality in their record to justify the killings or injuries. The fact remains that even someone with criminal records cannot – under any circumstances – be gunned down in this way if one were to adhere to the rule of law.

The police only can open fire at criminals in self-defense, when all other means to overpower them are exhausted. The Supreme Court, in a landmark decision in Om Prakash and others Vs State of Jharkhand through the secretary, Department of home, Ranchi, clearly stated in 2012, “It is not the duty of the police officers to kill the accused merely because he is a dreaded criminal. Undoubtedly, the police have to arrest the accused and put them up for trial. This court has repeatedly admonished trigger happy police personnel, who liquidate criminals and project the incident as an encounter. Such killings must be deprecated. They are not recognised as legal by our criminal justice administration system. They amount to State sponsored terrorism.”

The police, on the contrary, are getting encouragements and impunity from the highest echelons of power, in this case none other than the chief minister himself. Yogi – in several press conferences – has categorically justified the killings and stated that these will continue till the crime is eliminated from the state. He flaunts the ‘encounters’ as his “zero-tolerance towards crime”.

The social profiles of those who were killed in the ‘encounters’ reveal majority of them come from the marginalised sections of the society such as Dalits, Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Muslims.

A grim pattern
According to police figures, 1,142 ‘encounters’ have taken place between March 20, 2017 and January 31, 2018. The highest number of encounters were reported from Meerut zone where 449 people were gunned down. It was followed by Agra zone, which witnessed 210 ‘encounters’. Third on the list is Bareilly zone with 196 ‘encounters’ and then comes Kanpur zone with 91 shootouts.

Interestingly, the least number of ‘encounters’ were carried out in Yogi Adityanath’s own constituency – Gorakhpur.

Clearly, western Uttar Pradesh has been affected more than eastern zone in the number of cases of shootouts. A significant proportion of those killed in these encounters are from four districts of western Uttar Pradesh districts of Shamli, Muzaffarnagar, Saharanpur and Bagpat.

Along with the ‘encounters’, the police have slapped 167 of the victims with National Security Act (NSA). Bhim Army founder and Dalit activist Chandrashekhar Azad is also part of the list. Cops have also seized assets worth Rs 150 crore so far.

So even if people were killed in the encounters were to be criminals, should they not be taken into custody and booked under due process of law, instead of being shot at, killed or injured.

Copy pasted FIRs
In all the first information reports (FIRs), the stories follow more-or-less the same pattern that the police were tipped off regarding the presence or location of one or more dreaded criminal, who were chased as they tried to escape in a car or a bike. The criminals allegedly then fired at the police who were forced to fire back – as retaliation in self-defense – and kill them.

However, some FIRs describe the gallantry of the policemen on duty and laud the bravado of killing. In most of the cases, as if copy pasted from the previous incident, it mentions how some people “managed to escape”, while some were shot.

The family members of the deceased, in majority of the cases, got the news of the death of their kins from WhatsApp or from third source, and not from the cops. They then had to hunt down the specific police station and collect the bodies of their kith and kins. This is in complete contravention of the Supreme Court guidelines in the PUCL Vs State of Maharashtra case on police encounters that says, “In the event of death, the next of the kin of the alleged criminal/victim must be informed at the earliest.”

In most of the cases, the families were not even given the post mortem report of the deceased.

The glaring cases
Furqan – a resident of Shamli – was imprisoned for seven years as an under trial for his alleged involvement in a village brawl. His family did not have the resources to secure his release. However, in October 2017, the police unexpectedly settled the case to get him out of the jail.

After two weeks, when Furqan went to Baghpat to visit one of his relatives, he stepped out of his house to go to a shop and never returned. His family later got the news that he has been killed in an ‘encounter’. It was said that he was a dreaded criminal with 36 cases of dacoity and a reward of Rs 50,000 on him.

The police claimed that they were conducting a routine check, when they chanced upon him. He and his associates – said the cops – were riding a bike and they refused to stop and rather fired on the police. In retaliatory gun fire, Furqan died, while others escaped.

His body – according to the post mortem report – showed injury marks, testifying torture, in addition to bullet wounds.

The question – his family raises – is how is it possible for someone to be involved in 36 cases of robbery when he was in jail for the past seven years?

Following his killing, all his five brothers have been arrested in different cases of robbery and theft. This has become a hindrance for the family to pursue justice for Furqan as they are drained of resources because earning members are lodged in prison.

The case of Sumit Gurjar created the maximum uproar and even forced the NHRC to send notices to the UP police. Gurjar was picked up on September 30, last year by plain-clothed policemen from a bus stop at Badhaut in Baghpat. After his family came to know of the incident, they begun a frantic search.

The Noida police allegedly offered to free Sumit in lieu of Rs 3.5 lakh. His family heard the rumour that he might be killed in an encounter and therefore, they reached out to top police officials of the state, the CM’s office and the NHRC but got no response.

In the meantime, Noida police declared a head money of Rs 25,000 on him which was soon doubled. The next day, it was declared that Sumit had died in an encounter while trying to escape in a car after robbing a cash van of a bank. Three other “unidentified assailants” – as usual – “escaped”, as per the police version.

The police claimed Sumit had several cases of robbery and extortion filed against him. The bizarre truth, however, surfaced that Sumit had no police case against him ever. There was another man Sumit Gurjar, who stayed in the same Chichretta village and had the exact same cases against him back in 2011. The NHRC visited his family and issued notice to the UP police. However, even after six months, nothing has been pursued further.

Much like the case of Furqan, the UP police slapped a rape case on Sumit’s two brothers – Raj Singh and Kamal Singh – and have allegedly been pressurising his family to withdraw the Sumit case in lieu of withdrawing the rape cases slapped against the two.

The spate of encounters that has become so routine in western Uttar Pradesh has also reached eastern region of the state.

The cases of Chhannu Sonkar and Ramji Pasi – according to the testimonies of their family members – hint at staged encounter and targeted killings. Sonkar was picked up from a fruit orchard near his house by the police. When he did not return till late night – said the family – the anxious family members called him on his cell phone. He reportedly informed that he was in Jahanaganj police station.

The next day, two policemen allegedly reached his house and informed his father Jhabbu Sonkar that Chaanu was being treated in the district hospital. Later, they got the news that him being killed in an ‘encounter’.

Ramji Pasi had won the Panchayat election in Jiapur, Azamgarh, and for that he came in contradiction with the dominant castes in his village. They first tried – alleged his family – to implicate him in false cases, failing which he was picked up from his house by the police and killed in an ‘encounter’.

The UP Human Rights Commission has set up an inquiry looking into the ‘encounter’ killings of Pasi, Mukesh Rajbhar, Jaihind Yadav from Azamgarh and Aman Yadav from Itarsi. The body of Jaihind Yadav had 21 bullet injuries on his body, which he apparently sustained while he was riding a bike being chased by the police. All these point at a certain aggression by the police and belie the theory of “firing in self-defense”.

On February 3, this year, cops opened fire on a vehicle in Noida that was returning from a marriage festival. The police jeep chased and fired at those on the vehicle. A gym trainer – Jitendra Yadav – suffered a critical bullet injury on his neck, while his brother Sunil Yadav was hit in the leg.

The police tried to pass off this as an ‘encounter’, floating the same story of “dreaded criminal trying to escape”. However, they had to retreat later as the victims had no crime record and the sub-inspector who shot at them was suspended and taken into custody. The constables, who accompanied him are however absconding and the details of the cases of why the shootout took place has visibly been whitewashed.

Speculations ran from altercation to caste conflict that led to the shootout. It unmistakably points out the uncontrolled trigger happy nature of the UP police and the way they have been going about shooting people.

The cases of Jitendra could catch media attention and could force the police backtrack was apparently also because of his economic position. At least five cases of poor Muslims from Shamli and Muzaffarnagar were reported in the media. They were Nadeem (30) and Jan Mohammad (24) from Muzaffarnagar, Shamshad and Mansoor, both 35 and from Saharanpur, and Wasim (17) from Shamli. They were under trails, who had already spent significant amount of time in jail for petty crimes. They were all registered in the police record because of their criminal past and their whereabouts known to the police. Hence, it became easy for the cops to hunt them down and kill them in alleged staged encounters.   

Courtesy: Newsclick.in 

The post Killing Fields of UP: The Reality of ‘Encounters’ Under Yogi Regime appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In June 2017, in an interview on India TV, Uttar Pradesh chief minister Adityanath said in response to criticism that the BJP government had failed to check crime in the state since coming to power, “Agar apradh karenge toh thok diye jayenge (if they commit crimes, they will be knocked down).” Three months later, data shows that this was not an empty threat. Clear indications of the shoot at sight policy of the Adityanath regime. Now, says Indian Express, the UP police have conducted 420 encounters with alleged criminals – and killed 15 – in the less than six months the Adityanath government has been in power, according to official data released on Friday. In the encounters between March 20 and September 14, 88 police personnel have suffered injuries. Ten of the alleged criminals were killed in the 48 days before September 14.

The statistics released by the director general of police headquarters showed that Jai Prakash Singh, a sub-inspector, died in an encounters with a gang of dacoits in Chitrakoot, reported the Indian Express.

The Inspector general (law and order) Hari Ram Sharma said that the encounters were part of the police’s efforts to “control crime,” according to the Indian Express report said. He also said that the police had arrested 1,106 people as part of the encounters, in which 84 of the accused were injured. Sharma justified police firing saying that criminals do not surrender without resistance so the police fire in retaliation. According to Sharma, the National Security Act is being used to charge 54 accused, while the properties of 69 others have been attached under the UP Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act.

“Police is accountable to the executive, judiciary, media and people. Every encounter is probed through a magisterial inquiry. The National Human Rights Commission has been informed about the deaths,” he told the Indian Express.

Questions are being raised over a series of tweets by Rahul Srivastav, who is the public relations officer at the director general of police headquarters. On September 1, Sunil Sharma, allegedly a wanted criminal, succumbed to his injuries from an encounter in the outskirts of Lucknow. The same day, Srivastava tweeted saying: “#uppolice enounter express halts in the capital… miles to go…” along with a news clipping of the encounter.

 
He tweeted again on September 12: “No count is final. It’s 5 now. A 12,000 rewardee criminal Raju succumbed to bullet injuries in Shamli, another got injured in Muzaffarnagar.”

Additional director general of police (law and order) Anand Kumar told the Indian Express that an aggressive approach towards criminals had been adopted. “We are identifying these wanted criminals to arrest them.”
 
 

The post Its Official, UP Police Conducts 420 Encounters in Six Months, Killing 15 appeared first on SabrangIndia.