COUNTERING THE SILENCE - citizensagainsthate.org

COUNTERING

CITIZENS’ REPORT ON EXTRAJUDICIAL EXECUTIONS

IN UTTAR PRADESH AND HARYANA, INDIA

THE

COUNTERING

THE

SILENCE

COUNTERING

THE

SILENCE CITIZENS’ REPORT ON EXTRAJUDICIAL EXECUTIONS

IN UTTAR PRADESH AND HARYANA, INDIA

May 2018

Citizens Against Hate

24 Adhchni, Khazan Singh Building

New Delhi – 110 017, India

www.citizensagainsthate.org

www.facebook.com/AgainstAllHate

www.twitter.com/AgainstHate_Ind

Citizens Against Hate is a collective of individuals and groups committed to a secular, democratic, caring In-dia. It seeks to provide practical help to victims of hate crime and to counter, through research, outreach, advocacy and litigation, hate in all its forms.

This report is the property of Citizens Against Hate. Those wishing to use its contents for non-commercial purposes, may do so freely. We’ll appreciate a word of acknowledgement.

This report is the culmination of a programme of work of a team of Citizens Against Hate, over time. It in-volved, firstly, community activists-cum-researchers directly engaging with survivor families, aiding and sup-porting them to organise documents, the legal help, and ultimately the courage to raise questions of duty bearers, regarding the murder of their near and dear ones in the face of, at best, silence, often reprisal. With-out the untiring commitment of these human rights defenders - Akram Akhtar and Salim Ansari in Shamli, Uttar Pradesh, and Mohammad Arif and Nasir Ali in Nuh, Haryana - this work would not have seen the light of day. @ Other researchers included, in alphabetical order, Baljeet Kaur, Shahnaaz Khan, Vipul Kumar and Mangla Verma, who spent long durations in the field, to take down testimonies of families, examine docu-ments, and interpret the partial data they had access to, seeking to understand the sequence of events. Mangla, as the resident lawyer, also helped with the legal eye to interpret documents and demystify records. Together they marshalled the core of the report’s findings. Saad Zaman and Quill law interns supported the process with background research and analysis. @ Sharib Ali, Khatija Khader and Fawaz Shaheen were at hand to help with planning and designing the research, and propping up the team’s sagging spirits, which was often. Mathew Jacob, Harsh Mander, Suroor Mander, Seema Nair and Devika Prasad provided generous ad-vice and guidance, and often, practical help. @ Shahnaaz Khan also helped with the production of the report, designing and getting it to printers in good time and shape. @ Sajjad Hassan led the study and report writing.

We would like to express our gratitude to all the victims and witnesses who agreed to be interviewed for this report, and generously helped us with relevant documents. We also acknowledge the plentiful help we re-ceived from Aman Biradari Trust in this endeavour.

@May 2018

3

COUNTERING THE SILENCE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of abbreviations ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….. Pg 5

List of Boxes ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…. Pg 5

List of Tables …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...….… Pg 5

Note on terminology …………………………….………………………………………………………………..……………………………………. Pg 5

Executive Summary ………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………..……………… Pg 7

1. Extrajudicial Executions …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Pg 11

1.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………. Pg 11

1.2 Methods and Sources ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………….. Pg 11

2. Incidence of recent extrajudicial executions …………………………………………………………………………………………….Pg 13

2.1 Uttar Pradesh …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………. Pg 13

2.2 Haryana ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………… Pg 14

2.3 The encountered: Targeting the vulnerable …………………………………………………………………………..………. Pg 15

3. Encounters and Fake Encounters: Police denial! …………………………………………………………………..……………….. Pg 16

3.1 Versions of the truth and sources ……………………………………………………………………………….………………….. Pg 16

3.2 Evident flaws in police version……………………………………………………………………………………..…………………. Pg 16

3.3 Torture, a common theme ………………………………………………………………………………………………...……………. Pg 18

3.4 Police encounters: Premeditated and with a design …………………………………………….………………………. Pg 20

4. Police undermining the Rule of Law …………………………………………………………………………………….………………… Pg 22

4.1 Refusing to register fake encounters ……………………………………………………………………….……………………… Pg 22

4.2 Mis-investigating fake encounters ……………………………………………………………………………….………………… Pg 23

4.3 Compensation in lieu of prosecution ……………………………………………………………………………………...……… Pg 23

5. Police reprisals: Silencing victims and witnesses ………………………………………………………………….………………… Pg 25

6. What enables police impunity? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………...……. Pg 26

6.1 Laws that enable police abuse ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Pg 26

6.2 Opaque systems and procedures ……………………………………………………………………………………………...…… Pg 27

6.3 The incentive structure, and command responsibility …………………………………………………………………. Pg 28

6.4 National institutions failing to lead …………………………………………………………………………………….………… Pg 28

7. Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………… Pg 29

7.1 Uttar Pradesh and Haryana: Patterns of silencing ……………………………….…………………………………………. Pg 29

7.2 Challenges to countering the silence ………………………………………………………………………………..…………. Pg 29

8. Recommendations ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………. Pg 33

8.1 To state parties ……………………………………………………………………………….………………………………….……………. Pg 33

8. 2 To international community ………………………………………………………….…………………………………..…………. Pg 34

8.3 To civil society and CBOs ………………………………………………………………….………………………………….………….Pg 34

Annexes:

Annex I – UP Table 1 (victims having submitted complaints to NHRC): Case snapshots ……………………….. Pg 37

Annex II - UP corresponding case memos ………………………………………………………………………………..…………….. Pg 46

Annex III - UP Table 2 (Rest of the UP cases): Case snapshots …………………………………………………………..….. Pg 68

Annex IV - Haryana Table: Case Snapshots …………………………………………………………………………………………..… Pg 75

Annex V – Recommendations by UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (2012); updates on progress in 2015, and further in 2018 …………………………………………………………………...…….. Pg 86

Annex VI (a): Fact finding interview schedule and documents checklist …………………………………………...…….Pg 89

Annex VI (b): Initial mapping proforma ……………………………………………………………………………………….……….…. Pg 91

Annex Vi (c): Detailed mapping proforma …………………………………………………………………………………………….…. Pg 92

5


List of Abbreviations

CrPC: Criminal Procedures Code

FIR: First Information Report

HRC: Human Rights Council

ICCPR: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

IPC: Indian Penal Code

NCRB: National Crime Records Bureau

NHRC: National Human Rights Commission

OHCHR: Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights

PCA: Police Complaints Authority

RTI: Right to Information

SC: Supreme Court

UP: Uttar Pradesh

List of boxes

Box 1: Extra judicial executions & ‘fake encounters’ in India (Pg 12)

Box 2: The Persistence of Torture in India (Pg 19)

Box 3: Supreme Court judgement on encounter killings (Pg 20)

Box 4: NHRC guidelines on custodial deaths and encounter killings (Pg 21)

Box 5: National and International obligations on criminal procedures (Pg 24)

Box 6: Police reform in India? (Pg 27)

Box 7: Recommendations of the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial,

summary or arbitrary executions, to India (2012) (Pg 31)

List of tables

Table 1: Extra judicial executions in western UP – CAH fact finding list (Pg 14)

Table 2: Extra judicial executions in greater Mewat region (Haryana, Rajasthan, UP)

(CAH fact finding list) (Pg 14)

Note on Terminology

Panchnama: A statement, recorded at the scene of crime/offence, of persons present at the time of arrest, search and seizure, including Investigating officers, Prosecuting witnesses, the accused and any mediators.

7


1. There has been a large number of extrajudicial executions by the police in India in re-cent years, especially in Uttar Pradesh (UP), and over time in neighbouring Haryana, most-ly of Muslim youth. In UP, media reports, validated by government claims, count 50 deaths in ‘encounter killings’, from March 2017, when Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath took office, to date. In Haryana, there is no reported head count, estimates range from 15 to 50, over a ten year period.

2. This report, by Citizens Against Hate alliance, seeks to record the extent of the these ‘fake encounters’; document the circumstances of the killings; and investigate the working of the criminal justice system, specifically how guidelines by the Supreme Court and the National Human Rights Commission on encounter killings are being followed, as a means to understand accountability.

3. The research is based on a sample of 16 encounter episodes in UP, all in western dis-tricts; and 12 in Mewat region of mostly Haryana, involving mostly Muslim victims. It in-volved interviewing victim families and witnesses; examining legal documents available to us (FIRs, autopsy reports); asking RTI questions to state police and NHRC; and extensively surveying media reports.

FINDINGS

4. All victims we studied, come from vulnerable social groups. Most came from poor ‘lower castes’ backgrounds, typically, landless farmers, engaged in manual labour and as farm hands, or working as informal sector workers, as hawkers. In UP most were undertri-als, with some past involvement in petty crime. In Haryana, most were from Meo and Guj-jar backgrounds, involved in cattle trade, either as drivers or handymen, or traders.

5. The police account of the encounters, paints a picture of hardened criminals attacking a police party lying in wait - warned by prior intelligence - and the police party returning fire in self-defense, resulting in the victim being fatally shot, while the unnamed accom-plice escapes. Examination of FIRs and post mortem reports, and interviews with family re-veals serious lapses in the police version.

FIRs spread over multiple episodes, use exactly the same text, hinting at use of a com-mon template by state police to record the version of the incidence.

There is similarity also in recovery of weapons from each deceased culprit. Most of those killed have, in police FIRs, the same number of weapons on them.

Basic procedures of criminal investigation, such as recording seizure memos and spot panchnamas, appear not to have been followed in many cases

Autopsy reports contradict the FIR version. Most bodies had tattooing marks and blackening of skin around bullet holes, indicating close range shooting and not a shoot-out. Most also had direct hits to the body, making a shoot-out implausible.

Police officers involved were minimally injured,

Lack of independent (civilian) eye witnesses to the ‘encounter’, whereas many persons

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


8

claim to have witnessed the victim being picked up earlier by the police.

Most victims were put on police’s most-wanted lists, after the murder.

6. Torture, a common theme across cases. Most families reported having received dead bodies that had signs of grievous injuries to the body, not explained by a shoot-out.

7. Encounters, not spontaneous, but pre-planned, designed to serve the purpose to instil fear in the minds of supposed criminals and raise the image of government in the public eye, as being tough on crime.

8. Supreme Court judgement and NHRC guideline exist for police to follow in encounter cases. Our research revealed these were being flouted routinely.

Most cases we studied, did not have FIR of murder of the deceased filed by police, something required by law

where families attempted to file complaint or seek help to address grievance, they were met by strong resistance from police, in the form of threats of charging in false cases, even of getting another family member ‘encountered’.

Where families had still yet tried to, the court has denied the petition on the strength of objections by district police

Police did not report encounter deaths, to family, another requirement

Family not provided legal documents (FIR, PM report…), another requirement

Family statement not recoded by police, or in magisterial enquiry, yet another obliga-tion

We did not find a single instance of a police officer having been prosecuted in these

Compensation provided to only a few cases, and mostly as a tool to silence families.

9. Widespread police reprisal, to silence families, preventing them from seeking redress.

Takes the form typically, of involving another family member in a petty case, hence instilling the fear of being picked up by police anytime. Other acts include harass-ment and vandalism by police of victim’s house; threats of murdering family members and relatives in ‘encounters’; and illegal detention of relatives.

Where families have mustered courage to speak out, more serious accusations have been made. In several cases, accusations of rape have been initiated by police against family members.

After media began reporting encounter cases in west UP, the police stepped up at-tempts to intimate affected families further, to silence them.

10. Impunity: Police’s continuing ability to undermine SC and NHRC directions to check ‘fake encounters’, speaks to the impunity they enjoy. Impunity is aided by:

i) Enabling laws, aiding police abuse:

Sec 46(2) of the Criminal Procedures Code, allowing police to use all means possible, including lethal force, to make arrests

Section 96 of Indian Penal Code recognizing individual’s right to self-defense.

Exception 3 of Section 300 of IPC

Section 197 CrPC, providing impunity to police personnel against prosecution

9


Harsh cow protection laws in several states, that give undue powers to police

ii) Lack of transparency in police functioning: Police procedures including recording of FIRs have remained opaque. There is also little independent complaints redress mecha-nism. Independent Police Complaints Authorities, required under Supreme Court guidelines on police reforms, have remained unrealized.

iii) Incentive structure: more towards violating guidelines, than observing them. In UP, state government seems to have launched a drive for encounter killings. Has also a re-ward system for officers fighting crime aggressively. Officers seen as high achievers, have been known to be given ‘prize’ postings. Similar in Haryana.

iv) National institutions, not proactive: NHRC tasked with checking encounter killings does not seem to be proactively pursuing the goal. Not much in the public domain on efforts to monitor implementation of its and SC guidelines.

11. RECOMMENDATIONS

11.1 State parties:

Central and State governments

i. Review laws that encourage impunity, to bring them in compliance with internation-al standards and obligations and to remove any legal barriers for prosecution of public servants: Section 46 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC); Exception 3 of Section 300 of IPC; and Sec 197 of CrPC;

ii. Enact laws on torture, and amend Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to make inadmissible evidence obtained on the basis of police interrogation that involved torture and other cru-el, inhuman, or degrading treatment or other illegal coercion

iii. Amend Sec 100 of IPC that enumerates the conditions for the exercise of the right to self-defense (u/s 96 IPC), by setting limit on the excessive use of force by police.

iv. Amend State cow protection laws (Haryana, 2015) specifically the sections that give excessive powers to the police, whilst putting the burden of proof on the accused

v. Amend Section 36 of the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2006 to permit the NHRC to inquire into violations pending before other commissions or which occur more than one year before the date of the complaint

vi. Implement Prakash Singh order on Police Complaints Authority at district and state levels, giving them adequate resources and powers, and independence.

vii. Revise SC guidelines to bring out specific and clear directions for recording of state-ments of family (and not just the "witnesses"); immediate access of the family members to FIR and post-mortem report; recording FIRs u/s IPC 302 - not leaving it up to the discre-tion of police to decide what kind of an FIR would be registered; and strengthening the NHRC to make it play a more proactive role in protecting human rights of those that are denied it.

viii. Encourage in police ranks, a culture that rewards respect for human rights and pro-fessional conduct


10

NHRC (and State Commissions)

i) Encourage independent investigations into police complaints. Take up cases men-tioned in the report for independent, timely investigation

ii) Establish a system of monitoring effective implementation by states of Supreme Court judgement and NHRC guidelines on encounter killings.

iii) Set up a system to support states and state police forces with capacity to be able to effectively implement the guidelines

iv) Make NHRC working more transparent, as aid to victims and civil society, to contrib-ute to better community monitoring of implementation of SC and NHRC guidelines.

To international community

i) Relevant mandate holders of the Human Rights Council (HRC) should undertake vis-its to India, to investigate cases mentioned here, and others of the similar nature

ii) Encourage state parties to independently investigate cases mentioned, prosecute officers found guilty, and order adequate compensation for victims, and protection for them

iii) Make communication to HRC/ Office of High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR) accessible for victims and civil society, to be able to seek redress through OHCHR.

To civil society/community based organisations

i. Better documentation of violations of right to life of victims, as evidence

ii. Better education of survivor families, on their rights to redress, justice and compensa-tion, among others

iii. Better support to families, to encourage them to voice complaints

iv. Better use of NHRC mechanisms to lodge complaints

v. Better use of special mandate holders (of UN/HRC) to bring cases of violation of rights

to life to the notice of UN mechanisms.

11


1.1 Introduction

There has been a large number of extrajudicial executions by the police in India, in recent years, especially in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh (UP), and over time in neighbour-ing Haryana, mostly of Muslim youth. Extrajudicial executions by police and security forc-es in India are commonly called ‘encounter killings’ or ’fake encounters’1. The Supreme Court of India (SC) and the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) have, from time to time, issued specific guidelines to prevent such killings, by holding the police and state authorities to account, procedurally. Yet these illegal executions continue, with seeming impunity. This brief report, by a civil society alliance to investigate the facts in the recent cases, seeks to unearth and report the truth in a sample of these cases, from a victim per-spective, in an effort to help survivor families seek justice and for the police and other ‘duty bearers’ to be held to account for their actions, strengthening the rule of law in India.

Citizens Against Hate, a platform of civil society organisations and individuals, investigat-ed ‘encounter’ killings in Uttar Pradesh and Haryana provinces, specifically looking at the large number of Muslim youth that were reported being targeted. The ‘fact finding’ field research conducted between October 2017 and April 2018, sought to record the extent of the executions; document the circumstances of the killings; and investigate the working of the criminal justice system, specifically how guidelines by the Supreme Court and NHRC were being followed, as a means to understand accountability.

1.2 Methods and sources

We used media reports and anecdotal evidence, to record ‘fake encounter’ episodes; inves-tigated a sample of cases (16 in Uttar Pradesh and 12 in Haryana), by visiting and interview-ing survivor families, and documenting their testimonies. The choice of these cases was determined firstly by our focus on western UP districts and Mewat region of Haryana and neighbouring Rajasthan, both with large number of reported cases of Muslim youth ‘encountered’, and where CAH has been working for some time, providing support to vic-tims of hate crime against minorities. (Citizens Against Hate, 2017). We gleaned official ac-counts of incidents though legal documents, and analysed those for contradictions; also sought to understand state’s compliance of Supreme Court and NHRC guidelines through making application to authorities under Right to Information (RTI Act, 2005) legislation. Throughout we also used media reports extensively to reference incidents and trends.

The report is organized as follows: We commence with cataloguing incidents in Uttar Pra-desh and Haryana, separately (sec 2), followed by reporting trends of the executions, to

1. EXTRA JUDICIAL EXECUTIONS

1 The Supreme Court in People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India and another, called death of aggressors by police

and security forces through disproportionate use of force as “administrative liquidation”. Supreme Court of India, in Extra

Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors (AIR 2016 SC 3400).


12

identify flaws in police accounts of the episodes as being encounters in self defense. (Sec 3). We then (sec 4) provide evidence on how the police undermines the criminal justice sys-tem, violating due process regularly; followed by (sec 5) trying to understand what enables police impunity in fake encounter cases, concluding (sec 6) with drawing out some com-mon threads on the subject. This is followed (sec 7) by a set of recommendations to state parties, to the international community, and lastly to civil society and CBOs. The detailed case records of the 16 cases from Uttar Pradesh and 12 from Haryana are annexed to the re-port.

Extrajudicial executions are defined as: "unlawful and deliberate killing carried out by order of a state actor, or with the state's complicity or acquiescence."(Viray, Patricia Lourdes, 2016). They refer to what the criminal law calls “murder” or “homicide”, being deaths caused intentionally, in this case by the attacks or killings by State security forces or paramilitary groups, death squads or other private forces cooperating with the State or tolerated by it. Extrajudicial executions also con-stitute the deliberate and intentional killings of civilians or combatants considered hors de combat as well as what are the result of a “merciless war”, i.e. those resulting from orders to leave no survi-vors. (Federico Andreu-Guzmán, 2015)

Evidence from India, points broadly to two types of extrajudicial executions carried out by the po-lice (Human Rights Watch, 2009:91)

i. In the first, suspects die during custodial torture or by execution and police deny all responsi-bility, claiming the death was caused due to other causes. instead that there were other caus-es for the deaths.

ii. In the second, known as “fake encounter” killings, the police acknowledge the killings but falsely claim they acted in self-defense or to prevent victims from fleeing arrest. These are fabricated shoot-outs, to win public favour or in furtherance of police officers’ own political or criminal ties.

The UN’s Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, noted:

Where they occur, “fake encounters” entail that suspected criminals or persons alleged to be terrorists or insurgents, and in some cases individuals for whose apprehension an award is granted, are fatally shot by the security officers. A “shootout scene” is staged afterwards. The scene portrays those killed as the aggressors who had first opened fire. The security officers allege in this regard that they returned fire in self-defence. After the incident, the security officers register an FIR, which often reflects their account of events. (2012:5, para 13)

Extrajudicial killings have long been a part of India’s socio-political landscape. It was first em-ployed in Andhra Pradesh in 1960s against individuals seen as opposed to the State. In the 1960s and 1970s, custodial and extrajudicial killings of Naxalites became standard police practice. In counter insurgency operations in Kashmir and Punjab, fake encounters became routine, as a quick way to get rid of society of terrorists and opponents of State. (Human Rights Law Network, 2008)

Box 1: Extrajudicial executions & ‘fake encounters’ in India

13


According to the Human Rights Watch report, in the late 1980s, the term “encounter killing” emerged, following a spate of police operations against individuals alleged to be involved in orga-nized crime. “Encounter specialist” police officers often made only faint gestures toward firing in self-defense because they enjoyed vast public support for what the media depicted as vigilante-style heroism in courageously hunting and gunning down criminals. The government awarded gal-lantry medals and promotions to police who “scored” dozens of encounter deaths, crediting the deaths, rather than arrests, with breaking organized crime’s stronghold on Mumbai and Delhi, and reducing gang violence in Bangalore. In this narrative, the police officer as judge, jury, and execu-tioner was necessitated by the impotence of a clogged court system that, given its low conviction rate, was out of touch with the reality of escalating levels of violence. (2009:92)

The problem has become so grave that the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, in his report to the Human Rights Council, after his visit to India in 2012, not-ed: “the NHRC also acknowledged the problem of encounters in India, and expressed its agree-ment with the view that encounter killings “have become virtually a part of unofficial State policy”. (p 5, Para. 17 )

2. 1. Uttar Pradesh

According to most recent reports, 49 persons have been executed (in over 1100 ‘encounters’) in Uttar Pradesh, since March 2017. (The Hindu, 31-03-2018) According to offi-cial data released by Uttar Pradesh police, there were 1144 ‘encounters’ in the state from 20th March, 2017, to 31st January, 2018, in which 34 criminals were killed and 2744 were ar-rested. (Outlook India, 01-04-2018)2. The latest case was reported in the media on 4th May, 2018, of one Rehan in Muzaffarnagar in western UP, with newspaper headlines reading, “Uttar Pradesh Encounter Death No 50: Same Chase, Same Story’. (Indian Express, 04-05-2018)

Extrajudicial executions have been common occurrence in Uttar Pradesh in the past too. NHRC registered 1782 cases of ‘fake encounters’ nation-wide, between 2000-2017. Uttar Pra-desh accounted for 44.55 per cent of all of these. NHRC recommended compensation in 314 of these cases, all over the country – 160 of these were from UP. (Firstpost, 02-02-2018) Yet the record of the past year, since Yogi Adityanath, the incumbent state Chief Minister, took power in March 2017 at the head of BJP majority government, exceeds all previous records. The current round of executions also seem to have a bias motive, against marginalized communities, particularly poorest Muslims.

We ourselves spoke with families of 17 victims of extrajudicial encounters, in 16 encounter incidents, all from west UP districts, with the highest concentration of ‘encounters’ in Uttar Pradesh. (Table 1) These are Shamli, Muzaffarnagar, Saharanpur, Meerut districts, with a high concentration of Muslims, and a social and administrative milieu that has seen much polarization on religious lines, over the past years, including that leading up to and affected by the mass violence that targeted Muslims in Muzaffarnagar, Shamli, and neighbouring districts, in 2013. We used media reports to identify victim families from these districts, and then through local partner networks reached out to the families.

2. INCIDENCE OF RECENT EXTRAJUDICIAL EXECUTIONS

2 Four policemen were also killed and 247 were injured during these encounters which took place in Agra, Meerut, Lucknow,

Allahabad, Bareilly, Gorakhpur, Kanpur, and Varanasi


14

Table 1: Extra judicial executions in western UP – CAH fact finding list

SN Deceased Date of incident District of incident

1 Ehsaan 25-03-2018 Saharanpur

2 Akbar 03-02-2018 Shamli

3 Noor Mohammad 30-12-2017 Meerut

4 Shamim 30-12-2017 Muzaffarnagar

5 Aslam 09-12-2017 Gautam Budhnagar

6 Ramzani 08-12-2017 Aligarh

7 Furqan 22-10-2017 Muzaffarnagar

8 Sumit 03-10-2017 Greater NOIDA

9 Waseem 28-09-2017 Meerut

10 Mansoor 27-09-2017 Meerut

11 Jan Mohammad 17-09-2017 Muzaffarnagar

12 Shamshad 11-09-2017 Saharanpur

13 Nadeem 08-09-2017 Muzaffarnagar

14 Ikram Tola 11-08-2017 Shamli

15 Qasim 02-08-2017 Mathura

16 Naushad 29-07-2017 Shamli

17 Sarwar 29-07-2017 Shamli

2.2. Haryana

There is no head count of those executed in neighbouring Haryana state, and our own Right to Information Act (RTI) questions to NHRC and state government have not revealed much. Our fact-finding investigation in Dec 2017- Feb. 2018, in Mewat area straddling Har-yana, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh3, was inspired by news, whilst undertaking an earlier fact finding on cow related vigilante killings against Muslims in the area in July 2017 (Citizens Against Hate, 2017), of frequent ‘encounters’ there. For our current fact finding, we used snowballing technique to base our data collection on, confirmed by civil society groups. This has provided the following list of 13 persons executed in 12 incidents. (Table 2)

Table 2: Extra judicial executions in greater Mewat region (Haryana, Rajasthan, UP)

(CAH fact finding list)

SN Deceased Date of incident Incident Location Home village/town

1 Talim 07-12-2017 Alwar, Rajasthan Salaheri, Nuh , Haryana

2 Munfaid 16-09-2017 Nuh, Haryana Salaheri, Nuh, Haryana

3 Naseem 20-08-2016 Alwar, Rajasthan Adbar, Nuh, Haryana

4 Ruddar 05-2016 Kosi Mathura, UP Hathin, Palwal, Haryana

5 Zahid 31-05-2015 NH-8, Rewari, Haryana Dhulawat, Nuh, Haryana

3 Technically Nuh district and parts of Rewari districts of Haryana, and adjoining areas of Alwar district in

Rajasthan state, all part of the wider Mewat cultural zone, inhabited mostly by Meo Muslims.

15


SN Deceased Date of incident Incident Location Home village/town

6 Qarar 31-05-2015 NH-8, Rewari, Haryana Dhulawat, Nuh, Haryana

7 Arif Khan 20-10-2014 Alwar, Rajasthan Alwar, Rajasthan

8 Farid 30-12-2013 Gulalta, Nuh, Haryana Bharatpur, Rajasthan

9 Jasmaal 05-09-2011 Palwal, Haryana Hathin, Palwal, Haryana

10 Azmat 17-05-2011 Kosi, Mathura, UP Mamlika, Nuh, Haryana

11 Naseem 17-05-2011 Kosi, Mathura, UP Singar, Nuh, Haryana

12 Salim 15-05-2010 Mathura, UP Bharatpur, Rajasthan

13 Jahul 17-03-2010 Mathura, UP Hathin, Palwal, Haryana

Table 2: (continued)

2.3. The encountered: Targeting the vulnerable!

Uttar Pradesh

An analysis of the headcount of those executed in Uttar Pradesh in the past year, reveals that close to half of those were Muslims. (Muslims make up only 19 per cent of the total population of UP). Other victims too came mostly from ‘lower castes’ backgrounds. All be-longed to poorest sections – typically, landless farmers, engaged in manual labour and as farm hands, or working as informal sector workers, as hawkers. Most victims of executions were ‘undertrials’, viz. those incarcerated on suspicion of crimes and awaiting court convic-tions. According to National Crimes Records Bureau (NCRB) prison report 2015, two thirds of jail inmates in India were undertrials. Over 55 per cent of these were from marginalised groups (specifically Muslim, Dalit, Adivasi). In Uttar Pradesh too, this figure is especially high for Muslims (27 per cent). Evidence proves majority of undertrials are from poor back-grounds, accused in minor offences and have no access to legal aid. In and out of jail since early adulthood, undertrials are unable to have a normal life. According to the same NCRB report, 70 per cent of undertrials had not passed class tenth. (The Wire, 24-02-2018). Our list of 16 victims (Table 1) largely, reflects this profile.

Haryana

In Haryana too, all victims we identified were poor backward caste Muslims, such as Meos and Gujjars, mostly engaged in cattle trade and the meat supply chain, including drivers, manual labourers, and informal sector workers. All were socio-economically marginalized, were mostly assetless or had only a marginal asset base. Mostly trading in cattle and meat, they took great risks in these communalised times to continue to trade in cattle and meat. Their traditional skills in these professions and the lack of alternative means of livelihoods, acted to keep them locked in these high-risk professions. Literacy levels are low and educa-tion attainment only poor for victims and the dependents they left behind.

These finding resonate earlier insights on extra judicial executions, that highlighted the fact that traditionally marginalized groups are especially vulnerable to abuse. (Human Rights Watch, 2009). The report goes on to explain “…… that vulnerability is … the product of an abusive police culture in which an individual’s ability to pay a bribe, trade on social status, or call on political connections determine whether they will be assisted or abused.” (Ibid).


16

3.1. Versions of the truth and sources

We begin our analysis by interrogating the claims by the police – made most brazenly through the media in Uttar Pradesh by the state administration, but more often and gener-ally in the writing of the First Information Reports (FIR) the police register of the ‘encounter’ incident – of the chain of events leading up to the encounter and its descrip-tion. This is not an easy task. A word on that is in order. Almost all of the official record generated of and around any encounter episode is owned by the police. These include, be-sides the FIR, entries in General/Daily Diary maintained at police station level, of all move-ments and incidents, Wireless log record, vehicle log record, ‘panchnama’4 and recovery records, as well as case diary once FIR has been registered and investigation commenced, among others. Problem is, most of these are neither available publically, nor is it easy to access these documents easily. One could ask for these through RTI applications, and trial courts could order these records to be provided to victims, but neither is an easy and time-ly route, nor is fool-proof. The official data sources for this analysis have therefore been weak. In the absence of independent civilian witnesses (in FIRs, accomplices are mostly un-named) and autopsy reports, either doctored or not available to victims, it is even more difficult to conclude definitively what the truth of the event was.

Family testimonies provide an alternative –providing information contradicting police ac-counts, of the circumstances in which the victim was picked up by the police, the condition of dead body that was received by the family, and the manner in which it was transferred by the police. Testimonies also provide an insight into police attempts to silence families, and of the reprisals against those that decide to stand up to them. Family testimonies therefore are vital evidence for our enterprise. We base most of our analysis of the cases, on family testimonies, as well as, unexpectedly, on the inconsistencies we noticed in police ac-counts, gleaned from the little official records we had access to. Based on this analysis, we can say that there is high plausibility of these ‘encounters’ being indeed ‘fake encounters’, i.e. extra-judicial killings by the police that have been staged by them and recorded as such. Below we provide illustration of the inconsistencies we noticed.

3.2 Evident flaws in Police’s claims

An examination of the documents we could access (FIRs mostly, but in some cases also au-topsy report), and interviews with family members of victims, reveal serious lapses in the police version.

i) The sequence of events which led to the ‘encounter’ as stated by the police in these widely divergent FIRs recorded by them, tend to be identical.

3. ‘ENCOUNTERS’ AND ‘FAKE ENCOUNTERS’:

POLICE DENIAL!

4 A statement, recorded at the scene of crime/offence, of persons present at the time of arrest, search and

seizure, including Investigating officers, Prosecuting witnesses, the accused and any mediators.

17


This is usually somewhat like this:

Just before the encounter, police receive tip off about the location of a known criminal. Police conduct checks/set up road block to apprehend the criminal. Bikes or cars that the alleged criminals are in, refuse to stop, when waved down, and instead start shooting at the police. Police fire back in self-defense. Victims receive bullet injures and die on the spot or are declared dead on being brought to a hospital, while the alleged accomplice if any (who remains unknown), es-capes. A cache of arms and cartridges is recovered from the site.

In Uttar Pradesh, we noticed multiple FIRs used exactly the same text, hinting at use of a common template by state police to record the version of the incidence. These all identify the victim as aggressor, against whom the police fired in self-defense.

Majority of the FIRs had different versions of the following formulation describing the inci-dent, adapted to local contexts:

Police were alerted of (numbers) criminals who were roaming in (place) to com-mit loot and robbery. Police set up barricades to apprehend the criminals. The criminals numbering ….on a motorcycle, tried to flee after seeing the police. They were chased by the police. Criminals fired gun shots at police, police fired back in self-defense. One criminal was injured, who was taken to hospital, but suc-cumbed to his injuries, on the way or on reaching the hospital. The other accused escaped and could not be identified. Inspector (name) received a bullet injury on his thighs and Constable (name) was hit on his leg.

ii. There is also similarity in recovery of weapons from on each of the deceased culprits, whose volume too is questionable. Each person is found armed with one .32 bore pistol, and two .315 bore tamanchas (country made pistol), a 12 bore shotgun, and, in many cases, a musket. Most of those killed have the same number of weapons.

iii. Standard operating procedures relating to criminal investigation, such as recording seizure memos and spot panchnamas have not been followed in many cases , hinting that these were in-fact planted evidences. There are also serious procedural gaps in recoveries of vehicles, again hinting serious fabrication.

iv. Autopsy reports that we managed to access, contradict the FIR version

Most bodies had tattooing marks and blackening of skin around bullet holes, indicat-ing that the shooting had taken place at very close range, and could not be attributed to bullet marks in a shoot-out. (Waseem, 28/09/17, Meerut; Mansoor, 27/09/2017, Sa-haranpur; Sumit Gujjar, 8/10/2017, Baghpat)

Most cases had direct hits to the body, head, face or chest, again unlikely in a shoot-out. (eg, Waseem, 28/9/17, Meerut; Sumit Gujjar, 8/10/17, Baghpath; Shamshad, 11/09/2017, Saharanpur; Sarwar and Naushad, both 4/8/2017, Shamli; Mansoor, 27/9/17, Saharanpur)

v. Injuries to police officers in these incidents, as recorded in the FIRs, are consistently


18

minimal, with bullets just grazing past, even though the alleged criminals shot at them in-discriminately5. There are also not enough bullet shells to account for such indiscriminate firing. (Waseem, 28/9/17; Meerut; Mansoor, 27/9/17, Saharanpur; Shamim, 30/12/17, Mu-zaffarnagar)

vi. In many cases, the ‘encounter’ is reported to have occurred in sugarcane fields, through which, the police claim, the alleged criminals tried to escape. (eg. Furqan, 23/10/17, Shamli). Sugarcane plant can grow upto 6 metres tall – to get straight shots, especially with direct hits to the body in these, seems far- fetched.

vii. There is a lack of (civilian) eye witnesses to the ‘encounter’ – Example: Ehsan, 25/03/2017, Saharanpur, (Indian Express, 29-03-2017). Most accomplices that survive, are unnamed in the FIRs. At the same time there are many witnesses to victims being taken away by police just prior to being reported killed in an encounter. (Naushad, Sarwar, Aslam, Ramjani, all UP)

viii. In a majority of the cases, family members revealed, the police put the victims on most-wanted lists and with rewards on their head, just after the incident. (The Wire, 24-02-2018)

5 There have been 4 deaths reported among policemen, in Uttar Pradesh. (The times of India, 10-01-2018)

Mansoor: (27/9/17, Saharanpur): Mansoor’s mother identifies 2 police officers who took away Mansoor from their house in her presence, while other policemen stayed in the car; later that night, according to the mother, police came and forcibly took signature of father on some papers, not informing family that Mansoor had already been killed.

Sumit Gujjar (8/10/17; Baghpath): Witnesses saw police take Sumit away. When family tried to file a missing persons report with the police, they were refused.

3.3. Torture, a common theme

The autopsy reports we reviewed, and interviews with families, reveal torture, as a common theme across the cases

Ikram (11/8/17, Baghpat): As per autopsy report, Ikram received a total of 9 bullet inju-ries. It mentions three fractures to his body. According to family’s testimony, his body had severe wounds of torture. His ribs were broken and he had a large injury on the back of his head.

Ramzani (11/8/17, Aligarh): According to family, Ramzani had died due to torture, and was shot dead after.

Sumit Gujjar (8/10/17, Noida): Back and chest found blue, presumably with beating; back-bone broken as if some heavy object had been rolled over his body; ribs found cracked; arms were fractured. One eye was totally mutilated and two teeth were miss-ing,

19


Shamshad (11/09/17, Saharanpur): broken bones. Autopsy report reveals that the body was 3-4 days old, while police had claimed the death to have occurred the same day.

Aslam (9/12/17, Noida): Excerpt from wife’s testimony:

“When my husband’s dead body was brought home, I noticed multiple signs of torture. His waist

was black and blue in colour and his hands were broken, suggesting that my husband was beat-

en and tortured before being short.”

Naushad and Sarwar (4/8/17, Shamli): Family testimony mentions several broken bones and torture wounds

Nadeem (8/9/17, Muzaffarnagar): family describes all bones being broken, and body having cigarette torture burn marks

Aslam (9/12/17, Noida): arms and legs fractured according to family, severe beatings and torture marks

Noor Mohd: family attests broken arm, broken leg, severe beatings. Family is in pos-session of recent x-ray report (prior to encounter), showing serious knee injury, prov-ing the victim was in severe pain and would physically be incapable of a stand-off with the police, as the police claims.

Zahid (31/5/15, Rewari, Haryana): According to family and friends, Zahid’s body was severely disfigured including face, with acid, some body parts were missing.

Box 2: The persistence of torture in India

Torture by police is routine in India. The Supreme Court has said that “dehumanizing torture, assault and death in custody” are so “widespread” as to “raise serious questions about credibility of rule of law and administration of criminal justice.” (Dalbir Singh v. State of U.P. and Ors., WRIT PETITION (Crl.) NO. 193 OF 2006, decided 2/3/2009, paras. 8-9). Documentation done by NHRC and human rights groups indicate minimally more than 1000 cases of torture and custodial death every year. (Lokaneeta & Jesani, 2016). Its purpose and severity varies across different contexts in India.

What is lacking is a special law criminalising torture in India or governing mechanisms on pre-vention of torture. In 2010 the Prevention of Torture Bill was introduced by the government in the Parliament, but it lapsed without seeing the light of day. In 2017, Law Commission of India in its 273rd report presented a draft of The Prevention of Torture Bill 2017, but the bill has not been tak-en up in the Parliament so far, indicating the lack of enthusiasm by the state to come clean on tor-ture practices.

This evident lack of will is remarkable, given India’s commitment made to the international com-munity and to its own citizens.

In 1997, India signed the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, in short, UN Convention Against Torture, adopted by UN General As-sembly on 10th December, 1984 (Resolution No.39/46). India has also ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICPPR). Both statutes prohibit torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. These commitments are also reflected in the court pronouncements.


20

For example, Supreme Court has interpreted the constitutional right to liberty and human dignity

as an “an inbuilt guarantee against torture or assault by the State or its functionaries.” (Dalbir

Singh v. State of U.P. and Ors., WRIT PETITION (Crl.) NO. 193 OF 2006, decided 2/3/2009, paras.

8). Directives issued in D.K. Basu v. West Bengal establish detention procedures such as medical

examination of individuals in custody upon arrest and every 48 hours. D.K. Basu v. State of West

Bengal, JT 1997 (1) SC 1).

Box 2: (continued)

3.4 Police ‘encounters’: premeditated and with a design

Given the above inaccuracies in the police versions, the large-scale executions, in what is made out as bonafide encounters with criminals, seem like having been set up. In any case, these encounters do not come across – from interviews with victim families and particular-ly a study of the documents that are available – as being spontaneous. Rather there are signs of pre-meditated planning of these incidents and of stage managing communication around the encounter story.

In Uttar Pradesh, evidence points to use of encounters as a means to instill fear in the minds of criminals, and to raise the image of the state government and the police, in the public eye, as being tough on crime and criminals6. (The Wire, 24-02-2018). The NHRC said as much, in a recent notice to state government on the subject:

“ it seems that the police personnel in the state of Uttar Pradesh are feeling free misusing their power in the light of an undeclared endorsement given by the higher ups. they are using their privilege to settle scores with the people”. (NHRC, 6 Feb. 2018)

Box 3: Supreme Court judgement on encounter killings

Supreme Court of India in the case of PUCL Vs. State of Maharashtra [(2014) 10 SCC 635] issued the following guidelines as standard procedure for “thorough, effective and independent” investigation in

the matters of police encounters:

1. Any intelligence or tip-offs about criminal activities/movements must be recorded either in writing or electronic form

2. If pursuant to the tip-off, police uses firearms resulting in death of a person, then an FIR shall be registered and sent to the court as per sections 157 and 158 of CrPC.

3. Independent investigation shall be conducted by the CID or police team of another police station fulfilling eight minimum investigation requirements

4. Mandatory magisterial inquiry into all cases of encounter deaths

5. NHRC or State commission must be immediately informed; Commission shall get involved when there are serious doubts about independent and partial investigation.

6. Medical aid to injured victim/criminal and a magistrate or medical officer should record statement

6 CM Yogi Adityanath: ‘Today the people are secure and safe. The police used to be scared…we have changed

that. The police is leading from the front.’ (The Wire, 24-02-2018)

21


7. It should be ensured that there is no delay in sending FIR, diary entries, panchnamas, sketch, etc., to the concerned Court.

8. Full investigation report shall be sent to competent court under section 173 of Cr.P.C and trial should be concluded expeditiously

9. Next of kin of the dead should be informed at the earliest.

10. Six-monthly statements of all encounter killings to be sent by DGPs to the NHRC by 15th of January and July in a prescribed format

11. Disciplinary action and suspension of the police officers should be initiated evidence of their role emerges upon conclusion of investigation.

12. Compensation to be awarded to dependents of the victims who suffered death in police en-counter under section 357A of Cr.P.C.

13. Concerned Police officers must surrender their weapons for investigation, subject to rights under Article 20 of the Constitution

14. Intimate the family of the police officers involved in the incident and offer services of lawyer/counsellor

15. Out of turn gallantry awards should not be given immediately after the incident, to be given only when gallantry of the officer is proved beyond doubt.

16. The family of the victim can complain to the Sessions Judge if they feel that the guidelines

have not been followed or there exists a pattern of abuse or lack of independent investigation or

impartiality

Box 3: (continued)

Box 4: NHRC guidelines on custodial deaths and encounter killings

NHRC (and state commissions) are meant to be the principal agencies tasked with ensuring justice for victims of human rights violations, especially by state actors. NHRC has issued various guide-lines encounters and related killing in police action, over the years.

1. On 14th Dec, 1993 NHRC directed agencies to report matters relating to custodial deaths and rapes within 24 hours. (At that time, death in police action was classified under ‘custodial deaths’).

2. On 10th Aug, 1995 NHRC advised all Chief Ministers of the necessity of introducing video-filming of post-mortem examinations from 1st October, 1995 onwards to avoid distortion of facts.

3. On 27th March, 1997 NHRC recommended to all Chief Ministers that all States shall adopt the “Model Autopsy Form” and “Additional Procedure for Inquest” prepared by the NHRC based on discussions with experts and the UN Model Autopsy Protocol.

4. On 29th March 1997, NHRC issued Guidelines recommending the procedure to be followed by States and Union Territories with regard to encounter deaths. It was recommended, inter alia, that:

a) Deaths should be entered in an appropriate register at the Police Station;

b) It should be treated as a cognizable offence and investigation should commence;

c) It should be investigated by an independent agency such as the State CID, and not by offic-ers of the same Police Station;


22

d) Compensation to the victim’s dependants should be considered in cases ending in convic-tion.

5. On 2nd December, 2003, NHRC introduced following major changes/additions to the previous guidelines to introduce greater transparency and accountability:

a) If a specific complaint was made against the police, an FIR must be lodged;

b) A Magisterial Inquiry was now mandatory in every encounter death;

c) It also required the State Director General of Police to send a 6-monthly statement of details of all deaths in police action to the NHRC.

6. On 12th May, 2010, NHRC further revised the Guidelines containing the following major chang-es/additions:

a) The Magisterial Inquiry was required to be completed within 3 months;

b) Every death in police action was to be reported to the NHRC by the District Superintendent of Police within 48 hours;

c) A second report was to be sent to the NHRC by the District Superintendent of Police within 3 months, with the Post-Mortem Report, Inquest Report, Ballistic Report and findings of the Magisterial Inquiry.

(Source: National Human Rights Commission)

Box 4: (continued)

4. POLICE UNDERMINING THE RULE OF LAW

4.1. Refusing to register fake encounters

The Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) lays down procedures to be followed in criminal in-vestigations. Additionally, Supreme Court judgement in PUCL vs State of Maharashtra case (on ‘fake encounters’), and National Human Rights Commission’s guidelines on extra-judicial killings provide helpful directions, specific to investigation in extra-judicial execu-tion cases. Our examination of ‘encounter’ cases from UP and Haryana show violation of procedural norms at each stage.

i. First Information Reports: Most cases we studied did not have FIR of murder of the deceased filed by police, as required by law, and as explicitly stated in Supreme Court and NHRC directives on ‘encounter’ killings. [The only exception was Taalim (7/12/17, Alwar, Rajasthan). Rather, charges under sec 307(IPC) for the attempt to murder of police officials and under section of the Arms Act,1959 has been made out on the ba-sis of recoveries of arms and ammunitions.

ii. Our engagement with survivor families revealed that in cases where victim families had made any attempt to either file complaint or seek any help to address their griev-ance, they were met by strong resistance from the local police, in the form of threats of filing false cases against family or of getting another family member ‘encountered’.

iii. In the few cases where family has gathered courage enough to move the courts to file an FIR, the court has denied the petition on grounds of objections from district police claiming an ongoing investigation in the case or on the faulty grounds of jurisdiction

23


of magistrate court. This was so in the case of Furqan’s (23/10/17, Shamli), father, Mir Hassan (Harwada, Shamli) who tried to get an FIR registered of murder of his son.

4.2. Mis-investigating fake encounters

According to SC and NHRC guidelines, a death in encounter is to be reported to vic-tim family, without delay. In several cases, we were informed this was not done. In Waseem’s case, (28/9/17, Saharanpur), information reached the family through other villagers. In other cases, through WhatsApp forwards (Shamim, 30/12/17, Muzaffarna-gar), and through online news (Mansoor, 27/9/17, Saharanpur; Ikram, 11/8/17, Baghpath; Furqan, 23/10/17, Shamli).

Further the guidelines affirm that family of victim has a right to legal documents – FIR, autopsy report, injury report, and death certificate, et al. In several cases we ex-amined, they were denied these by the police, or were provided in return for family accepting the dead body without objections, and for quick disposal of the body. (Sarwar, 04-08-2014, Shamli). In other cases, the most basic documents were handed over to family only after much struggle. In Nadeem’s case (08-09-2017, Muzaffarna-gar), no documents, not even death certificate were made available to family.

In many cases family statement have not been recorded by the police, or when magis-terial enquiry were conducted, they were not recorded as required per SC guidelines. In many cases even Closure Report (Final Report) has been filed without consulting the family.

Mansoor (27-09-2017, Saharanpur): Excerpt from mother’s testimony:

“I have been informed that the Final Report (also called closure report) has been filed by police in

Mansoor’s case. There has been no statement of the family recorded by either the police or the

magistrate”

4.3. Compensation in lieu of prosecution

Since mostly, no FIRs of murder have been registered against police officers responsible, there is no case against police personnel. In our fact fining, we did not come across any case where a police officer was being prosecuted. Compensation has been awarded to families, on directions of NHRC, only in very few cases. In many of these, no investiga-tion has been initiated against the police. In fact, compensation has been used as a tool to silence the victim family rather than acknowledge the wrongful actions of police.


24

Failure to register FIRs:

By failing to register FIRs, the police are violating domestic law. The Criminal Procedure Code re-quires police to register an FIR whenever they receive information that on its face suggests the com-mission of certain criminal offenses such as murder, rape and theft. The Supreme Court has repeated-ly held that police cannot refuse to register an FIR in order to preliminarily investigate or by finding the claim non-credible or unreliable. [Ramesh Kumari v. State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Others, 2006 (2) SCC 677; State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal & Others, (1992)]. The registration of an FIR triggers a police investigation that must be completed “without unnecessary delay.” (CrPC, Sections 154, 157, 173)

The failure of police to register and investigate criminal offenses that deprive persons of their basic human rights violates the Indian government’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The UN Human Rights Committee (UNHRC), which monitors the com-pliance of state parties to the ICCPR, has stated that governments must ensure that victims have “accessible and effective remedies” to vindicate their rights under the treaty. (2004)

Under the ICCPR, the government is obligated to exercise due diligence “to investigate allegations of violations,” to bring those responsible to justice, and “to make reparation.” The police are to under-take prompt investigations, including efficient and effective collection of evidence, to facilitate prop-er prosecution of such crimes.

The UNHRC in its comments to India's report on its compliance with the ICCPR specifically urged "that judicial inquiries be mandatory in all cases of death at the hands of the security and armed forc-es and that the judges in such inquiries ... be empowered to direct the prosecution of security and armed forces personnel.” (HRC, 1997)

Under article 26 of the ICCPR, every person is entitled “without discrimination to the equal protec-tion of the law.” When a class of victims face police refusal to register and investigate crimes, or when that practice disproportionately impacts a class of victims, the government violates its obligation un-der article 26.

Arrests and detention:

The Indian Constitution establishes a right to life and personal liberty. (Art. 21-22). The Supreme Court has held that these rights inherently limit the police’s expansive arrest authority: police can make an arrest only if, based on an investigation, they have “reasonable belief” in “the person’s complicity” and “the need to effect arrest.” [Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P., 1994 AIR 1349, 1994 SCC (4) 260.]

The Constitution and Supreme Court judgments also establish procedural obligations for police once they make an arrest. (NHRC Guidelines for Arrest, November 22, 1999). Under the Constitution, when police make an arrest without a warrant, they must inform the accused of the grounds for the arrest and the right to bail. (Art. 22, also CrPC, sec 50). Police must produce an arrested person before the nearest magistrate without delay and at most within 24 hours, except in situations authorized by preventive detention laws. (Ibid)

In DK Basu v. West Bengal, the Supreme Court established mandatory procedures for police detention. in-cluding documenting an arrest in a diary entry and a memo, that is attested by a witness, and is counter-signed by the arrested person; and Police stations must post arrest information and send copies of related documents to the area magistrate. (D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, (1997) 1 SCC 416).

The ICCPR requires that arrest and detention be conducted in accordance with procedures established by law. (Art. 9) Arrest and detention are prohibited if they are arbitrary, that is, if they are carried out unlaw-fully or are manifestly disproportionate, unjust, discriminatory or unpredictable.

Box 5: National and International obligations in criminal procedures


All cases we studied had police actively undermine family’s ability to challenge police claims and seek justice. We came across several cases where police had made cases against victim’s siblings, relatives and even parents, under various sections of the law, or instigated others to accuse family members of rape, all in a systematic attempt to intimidate and pre-vent victim families from challenging the police version, accessing the criminal justice sys-tem and obtaining justice. The extent of planning we noticed, to silence victims was chilling.

Arresting family members by filing false complaints; frequent harassment and vandalism by police of victim’s house; threats of murdering family members and relatives in ‘encounters’; of illegal detention of relatives, and threats to prosecute surviving members of the family, have been some of the trends emerging from our interaction with survivor families. Specific examples include:

Waseem (28/9/17, Meerut): Elder brother of victim also killed in police ‘encounter’. Waseem shown to be involved (and escaped) in other encounter cases (Anuj). False case against mother for allegedly being a drug trafficker;

Father and mother both currently in jail. Police continue to threaten the family.

Furqan (23/10/17, Shamli): all five brothers accused by police in various cases, 3 cur-rently in jail, two out on bail.

Sarwar and Naushad (4/8/17, Shamli): Police has filed false cases against several family members, including of rape.

Sumit Gujjar, 28/10/17, Baghpath): Police has filed a rape case against brother of the victim.

Police reprisal became particularly serious once family members began to take action to challenge the police, and trigger the criminal justice system. HRDs supporting survivor families too have become victims

5. POLICE REPRISAL:

SILENCING VICTIMS AND WITNESSES

Furqan’s case (23/10/17, Shamli) is illustrative.

Meer Hassan, the father, wrote to the police (besides other authorities, including NHRC), seeking to have FIR registered against police personnel for the murder of his son. This was refused. He ap-proached the courts to order the police to register the FIT. The complaint was dismissed by the courts, forcing Meer Hassan to file a writ in the High Court for such directions. Action is still awaited by the HC. In the meantime, local police officers have been visiting the family and threat-ening them against taking any legal action against the police. This is particularly challenging for the family that are penurious – Meer Hassan works as a farm hand, sons work as labourers.

Excerpt from mother’s testimony

“The accused police officers are threatening my husband Meer Hassan and (sons) Anees and Rahul

that we should withdraw the case we have filed against them, or they will also be murdered in a fake

encounter.”

25


26

Jaan Mohd (17/9/17, Meerut): Five days after family questioned the police version, po-lice personnel landed up at their one-room home in Hussainpura village, Muzaffarna-gar, and broke everything there, including utensils, earthen boundary wall, thatched roof and string cots.

Nadeem (8/9/17, Muzaffarnagar): A day before our visit to the family, Nadeem’s mother was called to the house of village (Pradhan) council head. A government offi-cial was on a visit along with a local policeman. They enquired whether the family was seeking legal action in the case.

We also heard, in our visits, how, after media began reporting the fake nature of these ‘encounters’ recently (NDTV, 2018; Indian Express, 2018; The Wire, 2018), the police had stepped up attempts to intimate affected families further, to silence them.

6. WHAT ENABLES POLICE IMPUNITY?

Our fact finding confirms past understanding (including that reported in the Special Rap-porteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary execution, last visit to India in 2012) of what enables police impunity. The surprising thing is, so little seems to have changed.

6.1. Laws that enable police abuse: Various statutes exist

that are easily abused by the police, contributing to the inci-

dence of extrajudicial executions.

One such is Sec 46(2) of CrPC, allowing police to use all means possible, including lethal force, to make arrest, in a situation where the accused forcibly resists arrest or attempts to evade arrest. And whilst Sub Clause (3) of Section 46 imposes limitations on this right with respect to minor offences not punishable with death or life impris-onment - the section does end up giving police the powers, often arbitrarily used or misused. It is left to the discretion of the police officer to decide as to which means are necessary to effect the arrest of the person and which case can include the use of firearms by the police.

Another is section 96 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), that recognizes an individual’s right to self-defense. Problematically, Sec 100 of IPC enumerates the conditions un-der which the right to self-defense extends to causing death, viz. “where an assault is such as may reasonably cause apprehension that death or grievous hurt will be the consequence of such assault”. But no limits have been set on the disproportionate use of force by police7.

Similarly, Exception 3 of Section 300 of IPC enumerates that culpable homicide does not amount to murder if the offender, being a public servant or aiding a public serv-ant acting for the advancement of public justice, exceeds the power given to him by

7 Although the Supreme Court of India, in Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors (AIR 2016 SC 3400) stated that, “The right of self-defence or pri-vate defence falls in one basket and use of excessive force or retaliatory force falls in another basket. There-fore, while a victim of aggression has a right of private defence or self-defence (recognized by Sections 96 to 106 of the IPC) if that victim exceeds the right of private defence or self-defence by using excessive force or retaliatory measures, he then becomes an aggressor and commits a punishable offence.


law and causes death by doing an act which he, in good faith, believes to be lawful and necessary for the discharge of his duty as such public servant and without ill-will towards the person whose death is caused.

Provisions providing impunity to police personnel against prosecution. According to Section 197 CrPC, public servants are shielded from criminal proceedings against an “offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty” without previous sanction of the state or central government, as the case may be. The Indian record of sanctions provided by govern-ments in cases involving human rights violations by police and security forces is ex-tremely poor.

Cow protection laws in several states, empower police to act against those they sus-pect of violation of the law, such as cattle smugglers. The Haryana law, for example, where a large number of extrajudicial executions have taken place, empowers the po-lice and any person authorized by the state, to enter, stop and search vehicles used or intended to be used for export of cows, and seize the vehicle and the cows. (Sections 16 and 17, Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act 2015). Offences un-der this act are cognizable and non-bailable, and notably, the burden of the proof falls on the accused. Both Haryana, as well as Gujarat and Maharashtra cow protection laws, provide for protection of persons acting under good faith under these laws, con-tributing to impunity of police officers8.

6.2. Opaque Police systems and procedures

UP and Haryana police have a history of human rights violations historically, but police systems nation-wide, including recording of FIRs (a critical element that triggers the crimi-nal justice system chain) have never been touched by any attempts at transparency and openness. There is also little opportunity for citizens feeling aggrieved, to make a com-plaint and for that to be dealt with independently. Independent Police Complaints Authori-ties (PCAs), required to be put in place in districts and at state level, under Supreme Court guidelines on police reforms, have largely remained unrealized.

8 Gujarat Animal Preservation Act (1954) and its amendments (2017), section 12; and Maharashtra Animal

Preservation Act (1978), and its amendment (2015), section 13.

The National Police Commission, set up in 1979, produced eight reports on police reform in India but none of the major recommendations were adopted by the state governments. In 1996, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in Supreme Court of India by Prakash Singh and NK Singh, for-mer police chiefs, as a result of which the Supreme Court gave seven directives for the govern-ments to comply with. These seven directives emphasize the separation of investigation and law and order functions of the police and the need to keep a check on unwarranted influence or pres-sure on the police by state government. Directives include setting up of different Commissions and Boards with specific functions such as deciding appointments, promotions, postings, and transfers of police officers of different levels.

Box 6: Police reform in India

27


28

A key directive, having a bearing on transparency and police credibility, is about setting up of a Police Complaints Authority (PCA) at state and district level to inquire into public complaints against police officers in cases of serious misconduct, including custodial death, grievous hurt, or rape in police custody. The latest compliance report reveals that only 12 states have established PCAs at state and district level, however no state has followed the proposed terms of composition, selection process and functioning of the PCAs, failing to make these bodies independent an effec-tive for a for addressing complaints against the police.

Source: Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. Seven Steps to Police Reform (2010)

Box 6: (continued)

6.3. The incentive structure and command responsibility:

In part, the license to police personnel to carry out extra judicial executions is provided by political masters. In the case of Uttar Pradesh, the incentive is provided in the current con-text, by the claims of the BJP government to fight crime ruthlessly. The Uttar Pradesh gov-ernment even has (in complete violation of all SC guidelines) a reward scheme for govern-ment officials for encounters against criminals. (Outlook, 20-09-2017). In Haryana, the po-litical commitment of the BJP regime to protecting the cow, provides this context in which killing alleged cow smugglers has been normalized. Recently Haryana state Chief Minister was reported to have felicitated a senior police officer from neighbouring Uttar Pradesh state - Shamli district police chief, credited by his state government for undertaking many encounter killings - at a Hindu religious function. He referred to the said officer as a role model for other police officers to follow. (Times of India, 28-11-2017). In both Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, the Islamophobic climate generated by the majoritarian mindset, and fanned by BJP regimes in the two states and at the centre, provides license to police officers on the frontline as well as the leadership, to kill with impunity.

6.4. National institutions failing to lead:

Guidelines have been issued by the NHRC and by the Supreme Court, to enforce accounta-bility of the police. A flaw, we feel in these, is the reliance on the police itself to ensure en-forcement of these guidelines, without any effort at making police procedures more trans-parent, or subject to more independent oversight. The absence, in the system imagined, of any role of independent mechanisms to observe and play any role, is perhaps the missing link. There is also little attempt to make police procedures transparent, opening them up to scrutiny. In any case, police complaints procedures do not exist in India.

There seems also no mechanism put in place by Supreme Court or the NHRC to proactively review the implementation of the guidelines they have issued exclusively to check extra ju-dicial executions, except for the occasional demands to state governments for reports and evidence of actions. In effect, there seems little effort by national institutions to construc-tively engage with the question of extra judicial executions, beyond the one of issuing guidelines. In a recent RTI application we filed with the NHRC to obtain numbers and ac-tions, NHRC reply made use of the ‘sub-judice’ nature of the 2014 order of the Supreme Court – the fountainhead of most anti-summary execution laws and guidelines – to deny us information9.

9 Fact that the court case has not been closed and is ongoing.


7. CONCLUSION

7.1. Uttar Pradesh and Haryana: Patterns in the silencing

Extrajudicial executions have been a longstanding police practice in India. NHRC data shows that Uttar Pradesh has had a particularly strong association. (Firstpost, 02-02-2018). But Haryana too has had its share of police resort to excessive use of force, as demonstrated by National Crime Records Bureau data of persons killed in police firing. Of the 92 civilians killed in police firing in 2016 nationwide, Haryana accounted for 22. (NCRB, 2017. Table 16B.1).

Evidence from Uttar Pradesh and Haryana, conforms to the two types of extrajudicial exe-cutions carried out by the Indian police. In Uttar Pradesh, these are

The archetypal “fake encounter” killings, with the police acknowledging the killings but falsely claiming they acted in self-defense. These are, in all plausibility, manufactured shoot-outs, in the context of the police machinery responding to political leadership’s signalling a hard stance against crime and criminals, laced at times, with an element of bias against those from Muslim backgrounds, especially in the state’s western districts. The encounters then act as opportunities for police personnel to meet political and departmental masters’ expectations of crime control through aggressive policing, as well as to further their own personal interests. The public approvals they seem to be getting, come as unexpected bo-nus.10

In the case of Haryana and the wider Mewat region, the cases involved a police force armed with a harsh cow protection law, facing victims mostly from the Muslim Meo community – resident of Muslim majority Mewat in an otherwise Muslim-minority Haryana or Rajasthan - stigmatised in the public eye in Haryana and neighbouring areas, as cow smuggling crimi-nals. In many cases in Mewat, we notice a trend of victims having died, including during custodial torture or by execution, but police denying all responsibility. There were instanc-es too, of ‘fake encounters’, where the police claimed to have killed the victims in self-defence, as the victims, apparently failed to stop at police check points, and fired at the po-lice instead.

A common argument made by the police, rationalising excessive use of force (as a form of crime control) is that fake encounter killings only target individuals who are a danger to the public. Regardless of their motive, fake encounter killings violate domestic law and the pro-hibition against arbitrary deprivations of life under international law. (Human Rights Watch, 2009:93). As the Supreme Court has noted: “[T]he gravity of the evil to the commu-nity resulting from anti-social activities can never furnish an adequate reason for invading the personal liberty of a citizen, except in accordance with procedure established by the Constitution and laws.” [Prabhu Dayal Deorah v. District Magistrate, (1974) 1 SCC 103]

7.2 Challenges to countering the silence

Despite Supreme Court’s pronouncements and clear judgements directed at preventing them, as well as NHRC guidelines and international commitments, extra judicial executions continue, unabated. At the heart of the matter is impunity. Police are usually the only eye-

10 District Police chiefs in Shamli and Muzaffarnagar, where a large number of these encounters have occurred, have been reported to have been felicitated by traders and businessmen. (The Wire, 24-02-2018).

29


30

witnesses to these alleged encounters, which are typically carried out by junior and low-ranking police. But given the scale of this practice historically, and in UP’s case specifically – with the overt involvement of the entire state administration and senior officers - it is likely that state officials and senior police are not only aware of these killings, but allow, unofficially sanction or even order these killings. (Human Rights Watch, 2009).

Problem clearly, is systemic, making impunity of the crime that much difficult to chal-lenge. Add to that the fact that the incentives for putting an end to the practice are weak. The laws give wide-ranging powers to the police, and there are few checks to it, in terms of independent oversights or complaints mechanisms. Additionally, with the courts being overburdened and slow in dispensing justice, there is always, among police and law en-forcement agencies, an urge to take the short cut, and itself dispense justice. The incen-tives, in fact, are ranged towards further use of excessive force and to resort to practices such as extra judicial executions. The reward system created by political masters as well as the police leadership – linking success to elimination of alleged criminals, and a preference for aggressive policing against selected crimes and social groups11 – provides the license to frontline police officers to detain and eliminate petty criminals, in a show of effective crime control. The license also aids in the widespread use of torture as a means to extract infor-mation and evidence, or to punish those that police consider as criminals.

As the UN Special Rapporteur noted, the FIRs that are filed of the incident by the police itself, are frequently undisputed, which eventually leads to the swift closure of the case. Few encounter cases have been brought to the point of conducting investigations and, where applicable, prosecuting alleged perpetrators. Where inquiries are undertaken, the results are frequently not disclosed. The report added, another difficulty in the investiga-tion of encounters lies in the lack of witnesses, often due to the fact that encounters take place mostly during the early hours of the morning. Alternatively, witnesses fear coming forward with testimonies. In some cases, such a situation is further complicated by a re-ported practice of offering gallantry awards and promotions to security officers after the encounters, as well as of pressuring law enforcement officers, who face already heavy work-loads due to understaffing, to demonstrate results. (Human Rights Council, 2012, para 14)

Internal disciplinary proceedings are weak in India. Police investigations, either initiated by police or undertaken at the direction of external agencies, are often ineffective due to a “code of silence” that makes police unlikely to disclose incriminating evidence. Internal processes are also hampered by the lack of a police ombudsperson or dedicated internal monitoring unit. (Human Rights Watch, 2009:99-100). Data shows that internal discipli-nary proceedings do not ordinarily result in serious disciplinary actions against perpetra-tors. Of the only 13 cases registered against the police for human rights violations cases in fake encounters, nation-wide in 2016, only in 4 cases were the accused charged. Eventually none was convicted. (NCRB, 2016. Table 16A.6). Independent investigation has the poten-tial to tip the scale. But these are rare in India. Impunity thrives, therefore.

11 Compare the hard stance by Uttar Pradesh government regarding encounters, to the soft stance against vio-

lence directed at marginalized groups, particularly minorities, Dalits and women, including by BJP legislators.

Recently UP government was reported to be ordering the closure of cases (numbering 131, including 13 of murder

and 11 of attempt to murder) against accused in the 2013 communal violence in western Muzaffarnagar and

Shamli districts, that included cases against several BJP leaders. (Firstpost, 22-03-2018) In violence that carried

on for weeks, close to 50 persons, most of them Muslims, were murdered, hundreds of houses destroyed, and at

its peak, some 50,000 persons were made homeless. Recently, the state government was reported to have initi-

ated action to withdraw cases against senior BJP leaders charged with inciting the violence (Indian Express,26-

04-2018).

31


Box 7: Recommendations of the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions made to India (2012)

Violation of the right to life by state actors

# 1. India should swiftly enact the Prevention of Torture Bill and ensure its compliance with the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

# 4. Section 46 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and legislation in all states regarding use of force, including the exceptional use of lethal force, by all security officers should be reviewed to ensure compliance with international human rights law principles of proportionality and necessi-ty.

# 5. Section 197 of the CrPC should be reviewed to remove any legal barriers for the criminal pros-ecution of a public servant, including the need for prior sanction from the Government.

# 8. India should ensure that the registration of FIRs is prompt and mandatory in all cases of un-lawful killings and death threats. The authorities should put in place an independent mechanism to monitor the registration of such reports following any request to do so, and to punish law en-forcement officials who refuse these.

# 9. India should ensure that command/superior responsibility is applied for violations of right to life by SFs.

Fight Against Impunity

# 12. India should put in place a mechanism of regular review and monitoring of the status of im-plementation of the directives of the Supreme Court and NHRC guidelines on arrest, encounter killings, and custodial death.

# 13. The establishment and effective functioning of the independent Police Complaints Authori-ties should be made a priority in all states.

# 14. Compensation cannot be a replacement for criminal prosecutions and punishment. Along-side payment of compensation, India should ensure that criminal investigations, prosecutions and trials are launched and conducted in a swift, effective and impartial manner in all cases of unlaw-ful killings.

# 15. Promotions and other types of awards for security officers suspected to have been involved in unlawful killings, including through encounters, should not be granted until a proper clarification of facts.

# 16. Autopsies should be carried out in conformity with international standards, and families of victims should have full access to autopsy reports, death certificates and other relevant documen-tation.

# 17. The Nanavati-Mehta Commission, and all currently functioning commissions of inquiry on various violations of the right to life, should ensure that their findings are published in a swift/transparent manner.

# 18. India should consider launching a process of reflection upon the need to reform its judiciary with the aim of reducing the length of judicial proceedings and strengthening the independent functioning of the judiciary.

# 19. A credible Commission of Inquiry into extrajudicial executions in India, or at least the areas most affected by extrajudicial executions, which inspires the confidence of the people, should be appointed by the Government. The Commission should also serve a transitional justice role.


32

Killing of vulnerable persons

# 20. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act should be re-viewed with the aim of extending its scope to Dalit Muslims and Dalit Christians.

# 21. The criminal legislation should be reviewed to ensure that all gender-based killings, as well as killings of any member of a tribe or lower caste receive high sentences, possibly under the form of life imprisonment.

# 22. An effective witness and victim protection programme should be established.

# 23. Information and awareness-raising campaigns, to raise knowledge of human rights and ac-cess to justice, with a particular focus on vulnerable persons. Legal aid mechanisms for vulnerable persons

National Human Rights Commission

# 26. A legal basis should also be put in place to enable the extension of the period of one year un-der which the NHRC can consider cases.

# 27. NHRC should issue guidelines on the conduct of inquests and autopsies in all cases of un-lawful killings.

# 28. The independence and functioning of State human rights commissions should be reviewed to ensure compliance with the Principles relating to the status of national institutions.

Cooperation and engagement with International organisations

# 29. The practice of inviting UN special procedures should continue. Implement recommenda-tions on HRDs

# 30. Prompt ratification of the following treaties: (a) the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and its Optional Protocol; and (b) the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.

# 31. Consider ratification of the following instruments: (a) the two Optional Protocols to the In-ternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; (b) the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; (c) the Rome Statute of the Inter-national Criminal Court; and (d) the two Protocols additional to the Geneva Conventions.

Box 7: (continued)

33


8. RECCOMMENDATIONS

8.1 To state parties

Central and state governments:

i. Review laws that encourage impunity, to bring them in compliance with international standards and obligations and to remove any legal barriers for prosecution of public servants: Section 46 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC); Exception 3 of Section 300 of IPC; and Sec 197 of CrPC;

ii. Enact laws on torture, and amend Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to make inadmissible evidence obtained on the basis of police interrogation that involved torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or other illegal coercion

iii. Amend Sec 100 of IPC that enumerates the conditions for the exercise of the right to self-defense (u/s 96 IPC), by setting limit on the excessive use of force by police.

iv. Amend State cow protection laws (Haryana, 2015) specifically the sections that give excessive powers to the police, whilst putting the burden of proof on the accused

v. Amend Section 36 of the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2006 to per-mit the NHRC to inquire into violations pending before other commissions or which occur more than one year before the date of the complaint

vi. Implement Prakash Singh order on Police Complaints Authority at district and state levels, giving them adequate resources and powers, and independence.

vii. Revise SC guidelines to bring out specific and clear directions for recording of state-ments of family (and not just the "witnesses"); immediate access of the family mem-bers to FIR and post-mortem report; recording FIRs u/s IPC 302 - not leaving it up to the discretion of police to decide what kind of an FIR would be registered; and strengthening the NHRC to make it play a more proactive role in protecting human rights of those that are denied it.

viii. Encourage in police ranks, a culture that rewards respect for human rights and pro-fessional conduct

NHRC (and State Commissions)

i. Encourage independent investigations into police complaints. Take up cases men-tioned in the report for independent, timely investigation

ii. Establish a system of monitoring effective implementation by states of Supreme Court judgement and NHRC guidelines on encounter killings.

iii. Set up a system to support states and state police forces with capacity to be able to effectively implement the guidelines

iv. Make NHRC working more transparent, as aid to victims and civil society, to contrib-ute to better community monitoring of implementation of SC and NHRC guidelines.


34

8.2. To international community

i. Relevant mandate holders of the Human Rights Council (HRC) may undertake visits to India, to investigate cases mentioned here and others of the similar nature

ii. Encourage state parties to independently investigate the cases mentioned here, prose-cute officers found guilty, and order adequate compensation for victims, as well as protection for them

iii. Make complaints procedures/communication to HRC/ Office of High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR) accessible for victims and civil society, to be able to seek redress through OHCHR.

8.3. To civil society/community based organisations

i. Better documentation of violations of right to life of victims, as evidence

ii. Better education of survivor families, on their rights to redress, justice and compensa-tion, among others

iii. Better support to families, to encourage them to voice complaints and demand crimi-nal prosecution of those guilty

iv. Better use of NHRC mechanisms to lodge complaints, and trigger independent inves-tigations

v. Better use of special mandate holders (of UN/HRC) to bring cases of violation of rights to life to the notice of UN mechanisms.

35


Andreu-Guzmán, Federico. 2015. “Enforced Disappearance and Extrajudicial Execution: Investigation and Sanction” by Representative of the ICJ in South America, International Commission of Jurists.

Citizens Against Hate. 2017. Lynching Without End: Report of fact finding into religiously motivated vigilante violence in India. New Delhi: Citizens Against Hate

Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. 2010. Seven Steps to Police Reform, retrieved from http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/programs/aj/police/india/initiatives/seven_steps_to_police_reform.pdf

Firstpost. 02-02-2018. NHRC registered 1,782 fake encounter cases between 2000-2017; Uttar Pradesh alone accounts for 44.55%’

‘https://www.firstpost.com/india/nhrc-registered-1782-fake-encounter-cases-between-2000-2017-uttar-pradesh-alone-accounts-for-44-55-4332125.html

Firstpost. 22-03-2018. ‘Yogi Adityanath govt to withdraw 131 cases linked to 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots. Oppo-sition criticizes move’

https://www.firstpost.com/india/yogi-adityanath-govt-to-withdraw-131-cases-linked-to-2013-muzaffarnagar-riots-amnesty-to-murderers-says-opposition-4400595.html

Human Rights Council. 2012. Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary execu-tions, Christof Heyns. Mission to India (19-30 March 2012). Twenty-third session. Geneva: Human Rights Council

2015. Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns. ‘Follow-up to country recommendations’. India. Twenty-ninth session. Geneva: Human Rights Council

Human Rights Law Network. 2008. State Terrorism: Torture, Extrajudicial Killings and Forced Disappearance In India, Report of Independent People’s Tribunal, 9-10th February.

Human Rights Watch. 2009. Broken system. Dysfunction, abuse and impunity in the Indian Police. New York: Human Rights Watch.

2016. Bound by Brotherhood. India’s failure to end Killings in Police custody. New York: Human Rights Watch.

Indian Express, 29 March 2017. ‘Holes in Saharanpur encounter: Unheard shots, missing report and many versions’

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/holes-in-saharanpur-encounter-unheard-shots-missing-report-and-many-versions-in-saleem-death-5115289/

26-04-2018. Yogi govt moves to withdraw hate-speech cases against Sadhvi Prachi, Sanjeev Balyan

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/up-govt-moves-to-withdraw-hate-speech-cases-against-sadhvi-prachi-and-sanjeev-balyan-5152077/

4 May 2018. UP encounter death No 50: Same chase same story. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/up-encounters-yogi-adityanath-up-police-same-chase-same-story-5162715/

Lokaneeta and Jesani. 2016. Does Torture Prevention Work?

Outlook India. 20-9-2017. ‘430 police encounters in 6 months: UP Government’s strategy to tackle crime.’ https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/430-police-encounters-in-6-months-is-uttar-pradesh-the-new-encounter-republic/301947

01-04-2018. https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/uttar-pradesh-encounters-1144-encounters-from-march-2017-to-january-2018/310310

The Hindu, 31-03-2018. ‘Uttar Pradesh’s Encounters: 1000 and counting’ www.thehindu.com/news/national/ups-encounters-1000-counting/article23404224.ece

REFERENCES

http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/programs/aj/police/india/initiatives/seven_steps_to_police_reform.pdf

http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/programs/aj/police/india/initiatives/seven_steps_to_police_reform.pdf







http://indianexpress.com/article/india/up-encounters-yogi-adityanath-up-police-same-chase-same-story-5162715/

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/up-encounters-yogi-adityanath-up-police-same-chase-same-story-5162715/

https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/430-police-encounters-in-6-months-is-uttar-pradesh-the-new-encounter-republic/301947

https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/430-police-encounters-in-6-months-is-uttar-pradesh-the-new-encounter-republic/301947

https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/uttar-pradesh-encounters-1144-encounters-from-march-2017-to-january-2018/310310

https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/uttar-pradesh-encounters-1144-encounters-from-march-2017-to-january-2018/310310

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ups-encounters-1000-counting/article23404224.ece

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ups-encounters-1000-counting/article23404224.ece


36

The Wire, 24-02-2018. ‘A chronicle of the Crime fiction that is Adityanath’s Encounter Raj’. The Wire, 24 Feb. 2018. https://thewire.in/rights/chronicle-crime-fiction-adityanaths-encounter-raj

Times of India, 28 November 2017. “Now, Haryana CM Manohar Lal Khattar felicitates UP's ‘encounter cop’ at religious event”. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/meerut/now-haryana-cm-felicitates-ups-encounter-cop-at-religious-event/articleshow/61824735.cms 10-01-2018. ‘Over 900 encounters in Yogi Adityanath regime, 31 goons gunned down’ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/over-900-encounters-in-yogi-adityanath-regime-31-goons-gunned-down/articleshow/62444444.cms

Viray, Patricia Lourds. 2016. Extrajudicial killing a crime under int'l law.

https://thewire.in/rights/chronicle-crime-fiction-adityanaths-encounter-raj

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/meerut/now-haryana-cm-felicitates-ups-encounter-cop-at-religious-event/articleshow/61824735.cms

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/meerut/now-haryana-cm-felicitates-ups-encounter-cop-at-religious-event/articleshow/61824735.cms

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/over-900-encounters-in-yogi-adityanath-regime-31-goons-gunned-down/articleshow/62444444.cms

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/over-900-encounters-in-yogi-adityanath-regime-31-goons-gunned-down/articleshow/62444444.cms

37


ANNEXE-1

Ex

tra

jud

icia

l E

xe

cuti

on

ca

ses

in U

P

Lis

t 1

– w

ith

affi

da

vit

s

(arr

an

ge

d c

hro

no

log

ica

lly

)

S.

No

N

am

e o

f th

e v

icti

m,

pla

ce &

Da

te o

f in

-ci

de

nt

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t b

ase

d o

n F

IR

Inju

rie

s to

th

e b

od

y

Fa

mil

y t

est

imo

ny

D

eta

ils

of

leg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

1 S

ha

mim

s/o

Fa

kru

30th

Dec

emb

er,

2017

Pla

ce:

Fo

rest

nea

r vi

llag

e B

hal

wa,

PS

Ja

nsa

th,

Mu

zaff

arn

a-g

ar,

UP

SW

AT

Tea

m M

uza

ffar

nag

ar

and

Sp

ecia

l C

ell

Del

hi

Po

lice

h

ad i

nfo

rmat

ion

th

at S

ham

im

alo

ng

wit

h h

is a

cco

mp

lice

s ar

e p

lan

nin

g t

o c

om

e to

Jan

sath

an

d c

om

mit

ro

ad r

ob

ber

y in

a

Sw

ift

car.

A t

eam

of

po

lice

offi

-ci

als

com

pri

sin

g o

f 3

po

lice

o

ffici

als

of

Jan

sath

PS

, le

d b

y th

e S

HO

; 3

offi

cial

s o

f S

WA

T

Tea

m M

nz,

an

d 1

1 o

ffici

als

of

the

Sp

ecia

l C

ell

Del

hi

Po

lice

, re

ach

ed t

he

spo

t, w

aiti

ng

to

st

op

th

e cr

imin

als.

A s

wif

t ca

r w

as s

po

tted

, w

hen

as

ked

to

sto

p,

the

dri

ver

afte

r st

op

pin

g t

he

car,

sta

rted

firi

ng

at

th

e p

oli

ce,

and

ran

in

th

e o

pp

osi

te d

irec

tio

n. S

ham

im

wh

o w

as s

itti

ng

on

th

e fr

on

t se

at a

lso

fire

d a

t th

e p

oli

ce.

Po

lice

fire

d i

n s

elf

def

ence

, S

ham

im w

as i

nju

red

in

sid

e th

e ca

r. C

o A

sho

k K

har

i g

ot

in-

jure

d i

n t

he

cro

ss fi

rin

g,

bo

th

wer

e ta

ken

to

CH

C J

ansa

th,

wh

ere

Sh

amim

su

ccu

mb

ed t

o

his

in

juri

es.

Th

e o

ther

ass

aila

nt

man

aged

to

esc

ape.

Po

st M

ort

em R

epo

rt r

ec-

ord

s tw

o b

ull

et i

nju

ries

, o

ne

bu

llet

wh

ich

en

tere

d

the

bo

dy

fro

m t

he

bac

k o

f th

e h

ead

an

d e

xite

d t

he

bo

dy

fro

m t

he

fore

hea

d

and

th

e se

con

d b

ull

et

wh

ich

en

tere

d h

is b

od

y fr

om

his

rig

ht

tem

ple

an

d

exit

ed a

t an

an

gle

fro

m h

is

left

tem

ple

. A

cco

rdin

g t

o

po

lice

ver

sio

n o

f th

e in

ci-

den

t th

e ac

cuse

d w

as s

ho

t w

hil

e si

ttin

g i

n a

car

fro

m

the

fro

nt.

Fam

ily

also

sta

tes

that

th

ere

wer

e m

ark

s o

f to

rtu

re

on

Sh

amim

’s b

od

y.

Sh

amim

’s f

ath

er,

Fak

ru s

tate

s th

at

Sh

amim

had

lo

aned

Rs.

1 L

akh

to

his

rel

-at

ive

Ak

ram

s/o

Ab

ban

. W

hen

ask

ed t

o

rep

ay t

he

deb

t, A

kra

m t

ried

to

get

S

ham

im a

rres

ted

by

offi

cial

of

PS

Ja

nsa

th.

Ak

ram

was

in

co

nst

ant

tou

ch

wit

h p

oli

ce o

ffice

rs f

rom

PS

Jan

sath

wh

o

wo

uld

cal

l an

d i

nsi

st A

kra

m t

o g

et

Sh

amim

arr

este

d.

Tw

o m

on

ths

bef

ore

th

e al

leg

ed e

nco

un

ter,

Ak

ram

was

sp

eak

-in

g t

o p

oli

ce o

ffice

rs o

f P

S J

ansa

th,

wh

ich

w

as h

eard

by

Sh

amim

’s s

iste

r, S

abih

a an

d o

ther

mem

ber

s o

f th

e fa

mil

y.

Fam

ily

stat

es t

hat

th

ey g

ot

to k

no

w

abo

ut

the

alle

ged

en

cou

nte

r o

n t

he

mo

rnin

g o

f 31

st D

ecem

ber

, 20

17 t

hro

ug

h

the

loca

l n

ewsp

aper

s. T

hey

wer

e n

ot

in-

form

ed a

bo

ut

thei

r so

n’s

dea

th b

y th

e p

oli

ce.

3 F

IRs

(84

0/1

7, 8

41/

17,

84

2/17

) fi

led

o

n 3

1.12

.20

17 i

n P

S J

ansa

th,

MN

Z,

u/

s 30

7, 4

14 I

PC

, S

ec 2

5/27

of

Arm

s A

ct a

nd

Sec

41/

102

CrP

C a

gai

nst

S

ham

im a

nd

an

oth

er u

nk

no

wn

ac-

cuse

d p

erso

n.

PM

was

co

nd

uct

ed.

Fam

ily

no

t aw

are

of

inve

stig

atio

n

do

ne

by

the

po

lice

. N

o l

egal

act

ion

ta

ken

by

the

fam

ily

agai

nst

th

e p

o-

lice

offi

cers

.


38

V

icti

m,

Inci

-d

en

t e

t a

l P

oli

ce v

ers

ion

of

the

in

cid

en

t In

juri

es

to t

he

bo

dy

F

am

ily

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

ing

s

2 A

sla

m s

/o M

au

-sa

m A

li

9th

Dec

emb

er,

2017

Pla

ce:

Dad

ri,

Dis

tric

t G

auta

m-

bu

dh

Nag

ar,

UP

.

Po

lice

wer

e al

erte

d o

f tw

o c

rim

i-n

als

wh

o w

ere

roam

ing

in

Dad

ri

to c

om

mit

lo

ot

and

ro

bb

ery.

Po

lice

set

up

bar

rica

des

to

ap

-p

reh

end

th

e cr

imin

als.

Tw

o p

eop

le o

n a

mo

torc

ycle

, tr

ied

to

flee

aft

er s

eein

g t

he

po

-li

ce,

chas

ed b

y th

e p

oli

ce,

crim

i-n

als

fire

d g

un

sh

ots

at

po

lice

, p

oli

ce fi

red

in

sel

f d

efen

ce.

On

e cr

imin

al i

nju

red

, ta

ken

to

h

osp

ital

, su

ccu

mb

ed t

o i

nju

ries

, th

e o

ther

acc

use

d e

scap

ed,

cou

ld n

ot

be

iden

tifi

ed.

Insp

ec-

tor

Sau

rav

rece

ived

a b

ull

et i

nju

-ry

on

his

th

igh

s an

d C

on

stab

le

Vik

as w

as h

it o

n h

is l

eg.

2 b

ull

et i

nju

ries

, in

clu

din

g

on

e in

th

e h

ead

.

Fam

ily

no

tice

d t

he

bo

dy

had

sev

ere

tort

ure

mar

ks

- b

ack

was

blu

e, a

s a

resu

lt o

f b

eati

ng

s, a

rm a

nd

leg

s w

ere

frac

ture

d.

Asl

am &

Ram

zan

i h

ad s

tart

ed r

esid

ing

in

Yam

u-

nan

agar

, H

arya

na

alo

ng

wit

h t

hei

r fa

mil

ies.

Fam

ily

stat

es t

hat

a f

ew d

ays

bef

ore

en

cou

nte

r,

Asl

am h

ad v

isit

ed a

law

yer

as h

e w

ante

d t

o s

urr

en-

der

in

Co

urt

, in

cas

es r

egis

tere

d a

gai

nst

him

.

Asl

am’s

wif

e st

ates

th

at o

n 7

.12.

2017

so

me

men

to

ok

aw

ay A

slam

an

d R

amza

ni

on

th

e p

rete

xt t

hat

th

ey

wil

l h

elp

th

em t

o s

urr

end

er i

n C

ou

rt.

On

9.1

2.20

18 A

slam

’s c

ou

sin

, re

ceiv

ed a

cal

l fr

om

th

e p

oli

ce a

skin

g f

or

det

ails

su

ch a

s th

e n

ame

of

Asl

am’s

vil

lag

e et

c. W

as n

ot

info

rmed

ab

ou

t A

slam

’s e

nco

un

ter.

Fam

ily

was

to

ld b

y th

e P

rad

han

th

at A

slam

has

bee

n k

ille

d b

y N

oid

a p

oli

ce,

wh

ile

Ram

zan

i h

as b

een

kil

led

by

Ali

gar

h p

oli

ce.

Fam

ily

no

t g

iven

an

y re

ceip

t o

r p

ost

-mo

rtem

rep

ort

fr

om

th

e h

osp

ital

. H

is f

amil

y es

cort

ed b

y h

eavy

po

-li

ce p

erso

nn

el v

ehic

les

to t

hei

r vi

llag

e an

d t

he

po

-li

ce p

arti

es s

taye

d t

ill

the

bo

dy

was

bu

ried

.

FIR

No

.10

83/

2017

, P

S D

adri

, D

is-

tric

t G

auta

mb

ud

h N

agar

, ag

ain

st

Asl

am a

nd

an

oth

er u

nk

no

wn

ac-

cuse

d u

/s 3

07

IPC

. C

op

ies

of

FIR

an

d P

M R

epo

rt n

ot

giv

en t

o t

he

fam

ily.

Asl

am’s

fat

her

has

rec

eive

d s

um

-m

on

s u

/s 1

60

CrP

C f

or

reco

rdin

g

of

his

sta

tem

ent.

Asl

am’s

fam

ily

has

no

t b

een

in

-fo

rmed

by

the

po

lice

of

the

inve

s-ti

gat

ion

th

at h

as b

een

car

ried

ou

t b

y th

em.

On

29

.3.2

018

Asl

am’s

wif

e h

as

sen

t a

rep

rese

nta

tio

n t

o t

he

Na-

tio

nal

Co

mm

issi

on

on

Min

ori

ties

.

3 R

am

za

ni

s/o

S

ha

fiq

8th

Dec

emb

er,

2017

Pla

ce:

Nea

r N

a-n

au C

han

dg

arh

R

oad

, A

lig

arh

, U

P

Po

lice

go

t in

form

atio

n a

bo

ut

crim

inal

s lo

oti

ng

a c

ar.

Po

lice

set

up

bar

rica

des

to

ap

-p

reh

end

th

e cr

imin

als.

Cri

mi-

nal

s fi

red

gu

n s

ho

ts a

t p

oli

ce,

po

lice

fire

d i

n s

elf

def

ence

.

On

e cr

imin

al i

nju

red

, ta

ken

to

h

osp

ital

, su

ccu

mb

ed t

o i

nju

ries

, o

ther

tw

o a

ccu

sed

esc

aped

, co

uld

no

t b

e id

enti

fied

. A

Su

b-

Insp

ecto

r re

ceiv

ed

a b

ull

et i

nju

-ry

in

th

e cr

oss

firi

ng

.

Sal

ma,

Ram

zan

i’s w

ife

stat

es

that

th

ere

wer

e m

ark

s o

f to

rtu

re o

n R

amza

ni’s

bo

dy

and

his

han

ds

and

leg

s w

ere

also

fra

ctu

red

. It

als

o

seem

ed t

o t

hem

th

at h

e d

ied

d

ue

to t

he

tort

ure

an

d h

e w

as s

ho

t af

ter

he

had

die

d.

His

clo

thes

did

no

t h

ave

any

bu

llet

mar

ks

on

th

em.

Sal

ma

stat

es t

hat

on

th

e m

orn

ing

of

7.12

.20

17,

som

e m

en t

oo

k a

way

Asl

am a

nd

Ram

zan

i o

n t

he

pre

text

th

at t

hey

wil

l h

elp

th

em i

n s

urr

end

erin

g b

efo

re t

he

Co

urt

in

th

e ca

ses

reg

iste

red

ag

ain

st t

hem

.

In t

he

mo

rnin

g o

f 9

.12.

2017

, S

alm

a’s

bro

ther

, A

nee

s re

ceiv

ed a

cal

l fr

om

offi

cial

s o

f A

lig

arh

Po

lice

wh

o

stat

ed t

hat

Ram

zan

i w

as k

ille

d i

n a

n e

nco

un

ter.

S

alm

a st

ates

in

her

tes

tim

on

y th

at t

he

po

lice

mu

st

hav

e as

ked

Ram

zan

i fo

r h

er b

roth

er’s

nu

mb

er w

hil

e to

rtu

rin

g h

im.

Du

e to

fea

r o

f p

oss

ible

po

lice

b

ack

lash

, an

d t

he

stru

gg

le o

f su

r-vi

val

that

th

e fa

mil

y is

un

der

go

-in

g, th

e fa

mil

y h

as n

ot

pu

rsu

ed

any

leg

al a

ctio

n a

gai

nst

th

e p

oli

ce

offi

cial

s so

far

.

An

FIR

was

reg

iste

red

in

PS

A

kra

bad

, A

lig

arh

ag

ain

st R

amza

-n

i. T

he

fam

ily

did

no

t h

ave

any

do

cum

ents

/an

y o

ther

in

for-

mat

ion

ab

ou

t th

e ca

se.


V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

to t

he

bo

dy

F

am

ily

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

ing

s

4

Fu

rqa

n S

/o M

ee

r H

ass

an

22n

d O

cto

ber

, 20

17

Pla

ce:

Su

gar

can

e fi

eld

s n

ear

Bad

akta

C

anal

Bri

dg

e,

Bu

dh

ana

Po

lice

Sta

-ti

on

(P

.S.)

, D

istr

ict

Mu

zaff

arn

agar

.

Po

lice

at

the

chec

kp

ost

saw

2

mo

torc

ycle

s w

ith

5 p

eop

le o

n

it.

On

see

ing

th

e p

oli

ce,

they

fi

red

gu

n s

ho

ts a

t th

em.

Po

lice

ch

ased

th

e b

ikes

, su

rro

un

ded

th

em a

nd

ask

ed t

hem

to

su

r-re

nd

er.

Cri

min

als

fire

d a

t th

e p

oli

ce,

po

lice

fire

d i

n s

elf

de-

fen

ce.

2 cr

imin

als

on

a m

oto

r-cy

cle

fled

aw

ay,

2 o

ther

cri

mi-

nal

s fl

ed t

akin

g a

dva

nta

ge

of

the

sug

arca

ne

fiel

ds.

On

e cr

im-

inal

, id

enti

fied

as

Fu

rqan

, w

as

inju

red

in

po

lice

fire

alo

ng

wit

h

SI

Ad

esh

Tya

gi

& C

o.

Har

ven

-d

ar..

Sen

t to

CH

C B

ud

han

a fo

r tr

eatm

ent.

Fu

rqan

su

ccu

mb

ed

to h

is i

nju

ries

.

Th

e F

IR i

s si

len

t o

n t

he

inju

ries

rec

eive

d b

y F

urq

an.

Als

o,

the

PM

Rep

ort

alo

ng

w

ith

oth

er d

ocu

men

ts h

ave

till

dat

e n

ot

bee

n g

iven

to

F

urq

an’s

fam

ily.

Fu

rqan

alo

ng

wit

h A

nee

s (c

ou

sin

b

roth

er)

and

Rah

ul

wer

e p

ick

ed

up

fro

m B

us

Sta

nd

at

Bar

aut

by

the

po

lice

. A

nee

s an

d R

ahu

l w

ere

tak

en t

o S

hah

pu

r P

S w

her

e th

ey w

ere

sho

t in

th

eir

leg

s an

d

arre

sted

in

fal

se c

ases

, w

hil

e F

ur-

qan

was

tak

en t

o t

he

fiel

ds

nea

r B

adak

ta C

anal

Bri

dg

e, P

S

Bu

dh

ana

wh

ere

he

was

kil

led

. T

he

enti

re i

nci

den

t w

as n

arra

ted

b

y A

nee

s an

d R

ahu

l to

Mir

Has

-sa

n (

Fu

rqan

’s f

ath

er),

wh

en h

e m

et t

hem

in

th

e ja

il.

Mir

Has

san

sta

tes

that

th

ere

was

n

o r

ewar

d o

n F

urq

an’s

hea

d p

ri-

or

to t

he

enco

un

ter,

he

was

no

t w

ante

d i

n a

ny

case

an

d t

hat

Fu

r-q

an h

ad b

een

let

ou

t o

n b

ail

a m

on

th b

efo

re h

is e

nco

un

ter

and

h

e w

as r

esid

ing

wit

h h

is w

ife

and

ch

ild

ren

in

th

e p

ast

on

e m

on

th.

Mir

Has

san

an

d h

is s

on

s, r

ela-

tive

s an

d A

nee

s an

d R

ahu

l ar

e b

ein

g c

on

stan

tly

thre

aten

ed b

y th

e P

oli

ce o

ffice

r ac

cuse

d o

f k

ill-

ing

Fu

rqan

.

4 F

IRS

(79

7/20

17,

798

/20

17,

799

/20

17 a

nd

8

00

/20

17)

was

lo

dg

ed o

n 2

3.10

.20

17 i

n P

S

Bu

dh

ana,

Dis

tric

t M

uza

ffar

Nag

ar,

u/s

. 14

7,14

8,1

49

,30

7, 4

14 a

nd

411

IP

C;

Sec

tio

n 4

1 an

d 1

02

CrP

C a

nd

Sec

tio

n 3

, 25

, 27

an

d S

ec-

tio

n 4

/ 25

Arm

s A

ct,1

959

ag

ain

st F

urq

an a

nd

u

nk

no

wn

acc

use

d p

erso

ns.

PM

was

co

nd

uct

ed,

bu

t th

e P

M R

epo

rt n

ot

mad

e av

aila

ble

to

Fu

rqan

’s f

amil

y as

yet

.

A M

agis

teri

al I

nq

uir

y is

cu

rren

tly

bei

ng

co

n-

du

cted

by

Su

b D

ivis

ion

al M

agis

trat

e (S

DM

),

Bu

dh

ana.

Ch

arg

esh

eet

has

no

t ye

t b

een

file

d

by

the

po

lice

.

Mir

Has

san

has

file

d r

epre

sen

tati

on

to

var

i-o

us

auth

ori

ties

, in

clu

din

g N

HR

C.

A 1

56(3

) C

rPC

ap

pli

cati

on

was

file

d b

efo

re

the

CJM

, M

uza

ffar

nag

ar,

wh

ich

was

dis

-m

isse

d.

A C

rim

inal

Rev

isio

n P

etit

ion

is

cur-

ren

tly

pen

din

g i

n t

he

All

ahab

ad H

C a

gai

nst

th

e O

rder

of

the

CJM

.

A c

om

pla

int

was

file

d b

efo

re N

HR

C a

fter

th

e 15

6(3

) ap

pli

cati

on

was

file

d i

n C

ou

rt s

tati

ng

th

at t

he

accu

sed

po

lice

per

son

nel

hav

e th

reat

ened

th

e w

itn

esse

s an

d f

amil

y o

f F

ur-

qan

wit

h d

ire

con

seq

uen

ces

if t

hey

pu

rsu

e th

e ca

se.

NH

RC

had

tra

nsf

erre

d t

he

com

-p

lain

t to

SS

P M

uza

ffar

nag

ar t

o t

ake

app

ro-

pri

ate

acti

on

. M

eer

Has

an h

as n

ot

rece

ived

an

y re

spo

nse

fro

m t

he

SS

P M

uza

ffar

nag

ar a

s ye

t.

39


40

V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

to t

he

bo

dy

F

am

ily

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

ing

s

5 S

um

it K

um

ar

s/o

K

ara

m C

ha

nd

3.10

.20

17

AT

S C

ho

wk

, G

reat

er

No

ida,

UP

SH

O P

S K

asn

a Ji

ten

dra

Ku

mar

g

ot

to k

no

w f

rom

an

in

form

er

that

cri

min

als

arm

ed w

ith

.31

5 b

ore

rifl

e an

d o

ther

arm

s ar

e ro

amin

g a

rou

nd

in

a S

wif

t C

ar

nea

t A

TS

ro

un

dab

ou

t. T

he

Ri-

fle

was

rep

ort

ed t

o b

e st

ole

n

fro

m P

S E

cote

ch-I

II. S

HO

PS

K

asn

a al

on

gw

ith

6 p

oli

ce o

ffi-

cial

s (P

O)

wit

h S

HO

PS

Sec

tor

58,

An

il P

rata

p S

ing

h w

ith

2

PO

& S

O P

S B

isra

kh

Aja

y K

u-

mar

Sh

arm

a, w

ith

5 P

O a

ll

arm

ed r

each

ed t

he

AT

S C

ho

wk

to

lo

ok

fo

r th

e cr

imin

als.

Th

ey

saw

4 p

eop

le h

old

ing

gu

ns

wer

e st

and

ing

nea

r a

Sw

ift

Car

. W

hen

th

e p

oli

ce s

po

tted

th

em,

they

fire

d a

t th

e p

oli

ce a

nd

ran

aw

ay i

n t

hei

r ca

r. P

oli

ce c

has

ed

them

in

th

eir

veh

icle

s. T

he

car

go

t d

isb

alan

ced

an

d c

rash

ed i

n

the

gat

e o

f a

colo

ny.

Th

e cr

imi-

nal

s g

ot

ou

t o

f th

e ca

r an

d

star

ted

firi

ng

at

the

po

lice

par

-ty

. O

ne

bu

llet

eac

h fi

red

by

the

crim

inal

s h

it t

he

bu

llet

pro

of

jack

et o

f S

HO

Sec

tor

58 a

nd

S

O B

isra

kh

an

d S

I S

atis

h K

u-

mar

go

t in

jure

d w

ith

th

e b

ull

et

fire

d b

y th

e cr

imin

als.

Kar

am C

han

d,

Su

mit

’s f

a-th

er s

tate

s th

at a

fter

th

e al

leg

ed e

nco

un

ter,

th

e p

o-

lice

offi

cial

s w

ere

refu

sin

g

to g

ive

Su

mit

’s b

od

y to

th

e fa

mil

y m

emb

ers.

Th

e fa

mi-

ly h

ad t

o p

rote

st o

uts

ide

the

Mo

rtu

ary

in S

ecto

r 9

4

NO

IDA

an

d s

top

ped

th

e tr

affic

at M

aham

aya

Fly

o-

ver.

On

ly t

hen

did

th

e p

o-

lice

giv

e S

um

it’s

bo

dy

to h

is

fam

ily.

Su

mit

’s b

od

y, h

ad

gra

ve m

ark

s o

f to

rtu

re o

n

it.

His

bac

k b

on

e, a

rms

and

le

gs

wer

e b

rok

en,

and

his

le

ft e

ye w

as w

as g

riev

ou

sly

mu

tila

ted

. H

is n

eck

an

d

bac

k h

ad b

lue

inju

ry m

ark

s.

Kar

am C

han

d s

tate

s, o

n 3

0.0

9.2

017

at

10.0

0 a

m,

Su

mit

wen

t to

Bal

aun

i w

her

e h

e w

as a

bd

uct

ed b

y 6

-7 p

eop

le i

n p

lain

cl

oth

es i

n a

car

an

d fl

ed t

ow

ard

s B

agh

pat

. F

amil

y tr

ied

to

giv

e a

com

pla

int

to P

S.

Bal

aun

i, S

ing

hw

ali

Ah

ir a

nd

SP

B

agh

pat

, b

ut

they

did

no

t ta

ke

the

com

-p

lain

t an

d n

o i

nve

stig

atio

n w

as c

on

du

ct-

ed.

On

2.1

0.2

017

, B

agh

pat

po

lice

to

ld S

u-

mit

’s f

amil

y th

at S

um

it i

s in

po

lice

cu

sto

-d

y an

d i

s b

ein

g q

ues

tio

ned

reg

ard

ing

FIR

N

o.

394

/20

17 d

ated

20

.9.2

017

reg

iste

red

in

PS

Eco

tech

– I

II,

NO

IDA

an

d w

ill

be

rele

ased

by

nex

t d

ay.

Kar

am C

han

d f

ur-

ther

sta

tes

that

FIR

No

. 39

4/1

7 d

oes

no

t n

ame

Su

mit

as

an a

ccu

sed

. (t

he

FIR

is

reg

iste

red

ag

ain

st u

nk

no

wn

per

son

s).

On

th

e n

igh

t o

f 2.

10.2

017

, N

OID

A p

oli

ce

cam

e to

Su

mit

’s h

ou

se a

nd

to

ok

aw

ay a

ll

his

id

enti

fica

tio

n d

ocu

men

ts a

nd

th

reat

-en

ed t

he

fam

ily

that

th

ey w

ill

be

pic

ked

u

p k

ille

d.

On

th

e m

orn

ing

of

3.10

.20

17,

Kar

am

Ch

and

go

t to

kn

ow

fro

m h

is r

elat

ives

an

d t

hro

ug

h n

ewsp

aper

th

at S

um

it h

as

bee

n d

ecla

red

ab

sco

nd

ing

by

the

po

lice

in

a c

ase

reg

iste

red

ag

ain

st h

im a

nd

a

rew

ard

was

an

no

un

ced

on

him

. In

th

e af

tern

oo

n o

f 3.

10.2

017

, P

rave

en,

Su

mit

’s

bro

ther

fax

ed c

om

pla

int

lett

ers

to D

GP

, U

P P

oli

ce,

Ch

ief

Min

iste

r, U

P,

Nat

ion

al

Hu

man

Rig

hts

Co

mm

issi

on

. A

co

mp

lain

t w

as a

lso

sen

t to

Mr.

Lu

v K

um

ar,

SS

P

NO

IDA

, G

auta

m B

ud

h N

agar

, U

P, h

ow

-ev

er n

o i

nve

stig

atio

n w

as c

on

du

cted

.

Co

mp

lain

t le

tter

s w

ritt

en t

o C

ity

Mag

istr

ate,

NO

IDA

, G

auta

m B

ud

h

Nag

ar,

for

init

iati

ng

in

qu

iry

pro

ceed

-in

gs

agai

nst

th

e p

oli

ce o

ffice

rs.

No

re

spo

nse

. O

n 1

7.10

.20

17,

the

fam

ily

agai

n w

rote

co

mp

lain

t le

tter

s to

SP

B

agh

pat

, S

SP

Gau

tam

Bu

dh

Nag

ar,

Cit

y M

agis

trat

e N

OID

A,

IG P

oli

ce,

Mee

rut.

On

23.

10.2

017

, an

ap

pli

cati

on

u

/s 1

56(3

) w

as fi

led

bef

ore

th

e C

JM,

Bag

hp

at.

On

3.1

1.20

17,

the

app

lica

tio

n

was

dis

mis

sed

by

the

CJM

Bag

pat

, st

atin

g t

hat

th

e sa

id a

pp

lica

tio

n

sho

uld

be

file

d i

n D

istr

ict

Gau

tam

-b

ud

h N

agar

. T

her

eaft

er a

n a

pp

lica

-ti

on

u/s

156

(3)

was

file

d i

n N

OID

A

Co

urt

, w

hic

h d

ism

isse

d a

nd

th

e ca

se

is c

urr

entl

y p

end

ing

in

th

e A

llah

abad

H

igh

Co

urt

.

NH

TC

to

ok

su

o m

oto

co

gn

isan

ce c

ase

nu

mb

er -

30

160

/24

/30

/20

17-A

D,

case

is

pen

din

g f

or

rece

ipt

of

do

cum

ents

fr

om

SS

P a

nd

Dis

tric

t M

agis

trat

e,

Gau

tam

Bu

dh

Nag

ar.

FIR

No

. 8

61

and

86

2 w

as fi

led

ag

ain

st

Su

mit

Gu

jjar

an

d t

hre

e o

ther

un

-k

no

wn

acc

use

d p

erso

ns

u/s

30

7 IP

C

and

Sec

tio

ns

25 a

nd

27

of

Arm

s A

ct

1959

in

PS

. K

asn

a D

istt

Gau

tam

Bu

dh

N

agar

, o

n 4

.10

.20

17 a

t 12

.10

am o

n t

he

stat

emen

t o

f S

HO

Jit

end

ra K

um

ar,

PS

. K

asn

a. P

ost

Mo

rtem

was

co

nd

uct

-ed

by

a p

anel

of

two

do

cto

rs o

n

4.1

0.2

017

. V

ideo

gra

ph

y w

as a

lso

do

ne.

A

Mag

iste

rial

In

qu

iry

was

in

itia

ted

by

SD

M,

Gau

tam

bu

dh

Nag

ar a

nd

th

e fa

mil

y h

ad g

iven

th

eir

wri

tten

su

b-

mis

sio

ns

to t

he

SD

M.

41


V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

to t

he

bo

dy

F

am

ily

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

ing

s

5 (c

on

tin

ue

d)

Su

mit

Ku

ma

r s/

o

Ka

ram

Ch

an

d

3.10

.20

17

AT

S C

ho

wk

, G

reat

er

No

ida,

UP

Th

erea

fter

, p

oli

ce o

ffici

als

fire

d

5 b

ull

ets

at t

he

crim

inal

s. O

ne

crim

inal

go

t in

jure

d i

n t

he

po

-li

ce fi

rin

g a

nd

th

e 3

oth

ers

man

aged

to

esc

ape.

Th

e in

-ju

red

cri

min

al a

nd

SI

Sat

ish

K

um

ar w

ere

sen

t to

Dis

tric

t H

osp

ital

, G

auta

mb

ud

h N

agar

fo

r tr

eatm

ent.

Th

e in

jure

d

crim

inal

was

dec

lare

d d

ead

by

the

do

cto

rs i

n t

he

ho

spit

al.

A

wal

let

was

rec

ove

red

fro

m t

he

crim

inal

’s p

ock

et w

hic

h c

on

-ta

ined

his

Vo

ter

ID C

ard

. T

he

crim

inal

was

id

enti

fied

as

Su

-m

it s

/o K

aram

Sin

gh

.

As

per

PM

Rep

ort

he

had

o

ne

bu

llet

in

jury

on

lef

t si

de

of

his

ch

est,

an

d a

bu

l-le

t w

as r

eco

vere

d f

rom

his

ch

est

cag

e. T

her

e w

as a

lso

an

ab

rasi

on

on

his

rig

ht

sho

uld

er b

lad

e re

gio

n,

be-

low

sh

ou

lder

lin

e. S

um

it’s

fa

mil

y h

as b

een

giv

en o

ne

pag

e o

f th

e P

M r

epo

rt.

Th

ey h

ave

bee

n m

eeti

ng

an

d w

riti

ng

to

sev

eral

go

v-er

nm

ent/

po

lice

offi

cial

s to

g

et P

M r

epo

rt.

In t

he

nig

ht

of

3.10

.20

17,

Su

mit

’s f

amil

y g

ot

to k

no

w f

rom

NO

IDA

New

s C

han

-n

els

that

Mr.

Lu

v K

um

ar,

SS

P N

OID

A,

Gau

tam

Bu

dh

Nag

ar h

as i

ssu

ed a

pre

ss

stat

emen

t st

atin

g t

hat

offi

cial

s o

f P

S

Kas

na

and

Bis

rak

h a

nd

oth

er o

ffici

als

wer

e co

nd

uct

ing

a j

oin

t o

per

atio

n i

n

wh

ich

Su

mit

was

kil

led

in

an

en

cou

nte

r an

d 3

oth

er u

nk

no

wn

acc

use

d m

anag

ed

to e

scap

e. T

he

new

s re

po

rt a

lso

sta

ted

th

at S

um

it w

as a

gan

gst

er w

ho

was

ab

-sc

on

din

g f

rom

th

e p

oli

ce i

n c

ases

of

mu

rder

an

d d

aco

ity

and

had

an

aw

ard

of

Rs.

50

,00

0 o

n h

is h

ead

.

On

02.

10.2

017

, w

hen

po

lice

had

dec

lare

d

Su

mit

as

absc

on

din

g, h

is f

amil

y w

as

ask

ed f

or

Rs.

3,5

0,0

00

as

bri

be

thro

ug

h a

m

edia

tor

if t

hey

wan

t th

e p

oli

ce t

o r

e-le

ase

Su

mit

.

Su

mit

’s b

roth

er R

aj S

ing

h a

nd

Pra

vin

w

ere

imp

lica

ted

in

a c

ase

fals

e fo

r ch

arg

-es

of

rap

e an

d d

aco

ity.


42

V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

to t

he

bo

dy

F

am

ily

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

ing

s

6.

Ma

nso

or

S/o

Ak

ba

r

27th

Sep

tem

ber

20

17

Pla

ce:

Gan

dh

i G

hat

, G

ate

No

. 2,

Pu

kh

ta

Ro

ad,

PS

Sad

ar B

a-za

r, M

eeru

t.

Po

lice

wer

e in

form

ed a

bo

ut

3 cr

imin

als

on

a b

ike

loo

tin

g a

W

ago

nR

car

. P

oli

ce s

po

tted

th

e st

ole

n c

ar b

ein

g d

rive

n b

y 2

crim

inal

s, a

nd

tri

ed t

o s

top

th

em.

On

see

ing

th

e p

oli

ce,

they

tri

ed t

o r

un

aw

ay.

Po

lice

ch

ased

th

e ca

r, s

urr

ou

nd

ed

them

an

d a

sked

th

em t

o s

ur-

ren

der

. C

rim

inal

s fi

red

at

the

po

lice

, p

oli

ce fi

red

in

sel

f d

e-fe

nce

. 1

crim

inal

lat

er i

den

ti-

fied

as

Man

soo

r w

as i

nju

red

in

po

lice

firi

ng

, th

e o

ther

ac-

cuse

d e

scap

ed b

y fi

rin

g a

t th

e p

oli

ce a

nd

ju

mp

ing

th

e w

all.

M

anso

or

sen

t to

LL

RM

Med

i-ca

l C

oll

ege

Mee

rut

for

trea

t-m

ent,

su

ccu

mb

ed t

o h

is i

nju

-ri

es o

n t

he

way

to

th

e h

osp

i-ta

l.

Jave

da,

Man

soo

r’s

mo

ther

st

ates

th

at w

hen

Man

-so

or’

s b

od

y w

as b

rou

gh

t h

om

e, t

hey

no

tice

d t

hat

h

is b

od

y h

ad o

ne

bu

llet

w

ou

nd

on

th

e le

ft s

ide

of

his

ch

est,

wit

h m

ark

s o

f ta

tto

oin

g a

rou

nd

it.

Th

e P

ost

Mo

rtem

Rep

ort

als

o

stat

es t

he

sam

e. T

his

in

di-

cate

s th

at M

anso

or

was

sh

ot

fro

m a

clo

se r

ang

e st

raig

ht

on

his

ch

est

wh

ich

led

to

his

im

med

i-at

e d

eath

.

Jave

da

stat

es t

hat

on

26

th S

epte

mb

er

2017

, n

oo

n,

SH

O P

rash

ant

Kap

il a

nd

S

HO

Ras

hid

Ali

to

ok

Man

soo

r fr

om

his

h

ou

se.

Man

soo

r’s

fam

ily

kn

ew t

hes

e p

oli

cem

en f

or

10-1

2 ye

ars.

Nex

t d

ay

mo

rnin

g o

ffici

als

fro

m P

S B

ehat

cam

e an

d t

oo

k s

ign

atu

res

on

pap

ers

stat

ing

th

ey w

ere

war

ran

t p

aper

s o

f M

anso

or.

H

id t

he

fact

of

Man

soo

r’s

enco

un

ter

fro

m h

is f

amil

y, f

amil

y g

ot

to k

no

w

fro

m m

edia

rep

ort

s. N

o s

tate

men

ts

hav

e b

een

tak

en f

rom

th

e fa

mil

y b

y p

oli

ce o

r M

agis

trat

e.

2 F

IRs

(48

9/1

7 &

49

0/1

7) fi

led

on

th

e st

atem

ent

of

Pra

shan

t K

apil

, S

HO

, P

S

Sad

ar B

azaa

r, o

n 2

7/9

/17

in P

S S

adar

B

azar

, D

istr

ict

Mee

rut

u/s

30

7 IP

C a

nd

S

ec 2

5/27

of

Arm

s A

ct a

gai

nst

un

kn

ow

n

accu

sed

per

son

s. T

he

accu

sed

kil

led

in

th

e p

oli

ce e

nco

un

ter

was

lat

er i

den

tifi

ed

as M

anso

or

s/o

Ak

bar

R/o

by

Co

. Ja

yvar

dh

an,

Cri

me

Bra

nch

Mee

rut.

In

-q

ues

t R

epo

rt p

rep

ared

by

San

tosh

Ku

-m

ar,

Teh

sild

ar,

Sad

ar,

Dis

t M

eeru

t. P

ost

M

ort

em c

on

du

cted

at

Mee

rut

Med

ical

C

oll

ege

and

vid

eog

rap

hed

. O

n 1

0.1

0.1

7,

inve

stig

atio

n w

as t

ran

sfer

red

to

Cri

me

Bra

nch

, M

eeru

t b

y S

SP

Mee

rut.

On

3.

12.2

017

a fi

nal

rep

ort

was

su

bm

itte

d u

/s

173

CrP

C t

o C

JM,

Mee

rut

for

FIR

No

s.

48

9/2

017

an

d 4

90

/20

17 o

n t

he

gro

un

d

that

th

e ac

cuse

d i

n t

he

FIR

s d

ied

on

his

w

ay t

o t

he

ho

spit

al. T

he

GD

en

trie

s at

-ta

ched

wit

h t

he

Fin

al R

epo

rt s

tate

th

at

the

iden

tity

of

the

accu

sed

wh

o e

scap

ed

the

enco

un

ter

cou

ld n

ot

be

asce

rtai

ned

b

y th

e in

form

ers

reli

ed u

po

n b

y th

e p

o-

lice

. A

Let

ter

dat

ed 9

.12.

2017

fro

m t

he

com

pla

inan

t P

rash

ant

Kap

il,

SH

O,

P.S

. S

ada

Baz

aar

to t

he

CJM

, M

eeru

t st

ates

th

at h

e h

as n

o o

bje

ctio

n t

o t

he

Fin

al

Rep

ort

su

bm

itte

d b

y th

e p

oli

ce i

n t

he

abo

vem

enti

on

ed c

ases

.

On

26

.4.1

8 M

anso

or’

s m

oth

er,

Jave

da

has

sen

t a

rep

rese

nta

tio

n t

o t

he

Nat

ion

al

Co

mm

issi

on

on

Min

ori

ties

, N

ew D

elh

i.


V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

to t

he

bo

dy

F

am

ily

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

ing

s

7.

Sh

am

sha

ad

s/o

Sh

a-

hid

11th

Sep

tem

ber

, 20

17

Pla

ce:

Infr

on

t o

f IT

C

Gat

e, P

S S

adar

Ba-

zaar

, S

ahar

anp

ur

SH

O N

ano

ta w

ith

3 P

oli

ce

offi

cers

(PO

), S

O S

adar

Baz

aar

wit

h 5

PO

, S

WA

T T

Eam

wit

h 8

o

ffice

rs a

nd

tea

m f

rom

In

tell

i-g

ence

Win

g w

ith

6 P

O w

ere

loo

kin

g f

or

Sh

amsh

aad

an

d h

is

acco

mp

lice

wh

o w

ere

on

a

bik

e, a

nd

had

fire

d a

t S

HO

N

ano

ta a

nd

his

tea

m a

t a

chec

k

po

st.

Mo

torc

ycle

was

sp

ott

ed,

ask

ed

to s

top

, th

ey t

ried

to

ru

n a

way

, ch

ased

by

po

lice

. C

rim

inal

s fi

red

at

the

po

lice

. S

urr

ou

nd

ed

by

all

24 o

ffice

rs a

t IT

C G

ate.

B

ike

slip

ped

, cr

imin

als

op

ened

fi

re a

t th

e p

oli

ce t

eam

, in

th

e cr

oss

firi

ng

, S

ham

shaa

d w

as

inju

red

. T

he

oth

er c

rim

inal

es

cap

ed o

n f

oo

t, l

eavi

ng

his

g

un

.

SI

Aru

n P

awar

an

d C

o.

Aru

n

Ran

a in

jure

d i

n t

hei

r h

and

, w

hil

e 4

po

lice

offi

cers

rec

eive

d

bu

llet

s o

n t

hei

r b

ull

et p

roo

f ja

cket

s.

Sh

aam

shad

an

d i

nju

red

offi

cers

se

nt

to D

ist

Go

vt H

osp

ital

.

Sal

iha,

Sh

amsh

aad

’s w

ife

stat

es b

od

y h

ad m

ark

s o

f b

eati

ng

s o

n n

eck

an

d o

ther

b

od

y p

arts

. T

he

bo

dy

loo

ked

2-3

day

s o

ld s

ince

it

was

blo

ated

. B

ull

et w

ou

nd

s w

ere

surr

ou

nd

ed b

y b

lack

-en

ing

of

skin

, in

dic

atin

g

that

he

was

sh

ot

at f

rom

a

clo

se r

ang

e.

PM

R r

eco

rds

the

tim

e o

f th

e p

ost

mo

rtem

as

4.5

5 P

M o

n 1

1.9

.20

17.

Th

e P

MR

h

ow

ever

, st

ates

th

at b

od

y is

1-

4 d

ays

old

.

PM

R r

eco

rds

that

th

e 7T

h,

8th

an

d 9

th r

ib o

n l

eft

sid

e w

as f

ract

ure

d.

Th

e P

MR

st

ates

th

e fo

llo

win

g b

ull

et

wo

un

ds

– 3

bu

llet

s o

n t

he

fro

nt

left

sid

e o

f th

e ch

est,

o

ne

bu

llet

on

rig

ht

kn

ee

join

t.

Sal

iha

stat

es -

Sh

amsh

ad w

as i

mp

riso

ned

in

Deo

ban

d j

ail

for

pas

t ye

ar a

nd

a h

alf.

O

n 7

.9.1

7, h

e w

as b

rou

gh

t to

Vik

as N

agar

fr

om

Deo

ban

d j

ail

for

a h

eari

ng

, an

d o

n

the

way

bac

k t

o D

eob

and

, it

was

sai

d,

he

esca

ped

, al

on

g w

ith

an

acc

om

pli

ce.

Sh

e st

ates

th

at o

n 1

1.9

.17

she

hea

rd t

hat

S

ham

shaa

d w

as k

ille

d i

n a

n e

nco

un

ter

by

offi

cial

s o

f P

S S

adar

Baz

aar.

Sal

iha

alle

ges

th

at t

he

po

lice

offi

cial

s ar

e co

n-

coct

ing

th

e st

ory

of

Sh

amsh

aad

ru

nn

ing

aw

ay f

rom

jai

l. T

he

po

lice

offi

cers

had

il

leg

ally

kid

nap

ped

Sh

amsh

aad

on

his

w

ay b

ack

, to

rtu

red

an

d t

hen

kil

led

him

. L

ater

on

11.

9.1

7 th

e p

oli

ce s

ho

wed

th

at

Sh

amsh

aad

had

bee

n k

ille

d i

n a

n e

n-

cou

nte

r.

FIR

No

. 4

33 d

t 11

.9.2

017

file

d i

n

PS

Sad

ar B

azaa

r ag

ain

st S

ham

-sh

ad a

nd

an

oth

er u

nk

no

wn

ac-

cuse

d p

erso

n,

u/s

30

7 IP

C a

nd

S

ecti

on

41,

10

2 C

rPC

. A

n I

nsp

ec-

tor

leve

l o

ffice

r fr

om

PS

Ja-

nak

pu

ri m

ade

the

IO i

n t

he

case

.

Po

st M

ort

em c

on

du

cted

an

d

vid

eog

rap

hed

. F

amil

y n

ot

awar

e o

f an

y fu

rth

er i

nve

stig

atio

n.

Th

ey h

ave

no

t re

ceiv

ed a

ny

sum

mo

ns

fro

m p

oli

ce/c

ou

rt.

Sal

iha

stat

es -

th

e d

ay S

ham

-sh

aad

was

sh

ow

n a

s b

ein

g a

b-

sco

nd

ing

, p

oli

ce o

ffice

rs c

ame

to

thei

r h

ou

se a

nd

to

ok

Sh

am-

shaa

d’s

th

ree

bro

ther

s w

ith

th

em.

Sal

iha

had

sen

t w

ritt

en

com

pla

ints

to

NH

RC

an

d S

HR

C

and

th

e N

atio

nal

Co

mm

issi

on

F

or

Min

ori

ties

, d

id n

ot

rece

ive

any

rep

ly.

Du

e to

fea

r o

f p

oli

ce

bac

kla

sh, fa

mil

y h

as n

ot

pu

r-su

ed a

ny

leg

al a

ctio

n a

gai

nst

th

e p

oli

ce o

ffici

als

so f

ar.

43


44

V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

to t

he

bo

dy

F

am

ily

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

ing

s

8.

Na

de

em

(s/

o l

ate

Ir

sha

d)

8th

Sep

tem

ber

20

17

Pla

ce:

Jan

gal

gra

m,

nea

r Ja

twar

a N

ahar

P

ul,

PS

Kak

roli

, D

is-

tric

t M

uza

ffar

nag

ar,

UP

Po

lice

go

t in

form

atio

n a

bo

ut

2 cr

imin

als

on

a m

oto

rcyc

le l

oo

t-in

g o

ther

mo

torc

ycli

sts.

Po

lice

set

up

bar

rica

des

to

ap

-p

reh

end

th

e cr

imin

als.

Tw

o p

eop

le o

n a

mo

torc

ycle

, tr

ied

to

flee

aft

er s

eein

g t

he

po

lice

, ch

ased

by

the

po

lice

, m

oto

rcyc

le l

ost

bal

ance

an

d

fell

, cr

imin

als

fire

d g

un

sh

ots

at

po

lice

, p

oli

ce fi

red

in

sel

f d

e-fe

nce

.

On

e cr

imin

al i

nju

red

, ta

ken

to

h

osp

ital

, su

ccu

mb

ed t

o i

nju

-ri

es,

the

oth

er a

ccu

sed

esc

aped

, co

uld

no

t b

e id

enti

fied

. S

I V

ijay

K

r T

yag

i g

ot

hit

by

a b

ull

et i

n

his

arm

.

New

spap

er r

epo

rts

pu

bli

shed

o

n 9

.9.2

017

sta

te t

hat

Nad

eem

h

ad fl

ed f

rom

po

lice

cu

sto

dy

on

6th

Sep

tem

ber

20

17,

as a

re

sult

of

wh

ich

a r

ewar

d o

f R

s.

15,0

00

was

an

no

un

ced

on

him

.

Acc

ord

ing

to

Nad

eem

’s

fam

ily

his

bo

dy

was

han

ded

o

ver

to t

he

fam

ily

in a

g

has

tly

con

dit

ion

. H

is

arm

s, l

egs,

nec

k a

nd

sp

inal

co

rd w

ere

bro

ken

an

d t

her

e w

ere

mar

ks

of

bea

tin

g. T

he

on

ly v

isib

le b

ull

et w

ou

nd

w

as a

cle

an s

ho

t in

th

e fo

reh

ead

.

Fam

ily

stat

es t

hat

an

alt

erca

tio

n t

oo

k

pla

ce b

etw

een

Nad

eem

an

d a

lo

cal

jew

el-

ler.

Th

e je

wel

ler

file

d a

fal

se t

hef

t ca

se

agai

nst

Nad

eem

. T

he

po

lice

ask

ed f

or

a b

rib

e o

f R

s. 6

Lak

hs

to s

up

pre

ss t

he

FIR

.

Fam

ily

clai

ms

that

Nad

eem

was

pic

ked

u

p b

y th

e p

oli

ce o

n 5

.9.2

017

, an

d w

as

kep

t in

Th

ana

Nai

Man

di

and

to

rtu

red

. O

n 6

.9.2

017

, fa

mil

y sa

w N

adee

m i

n P

S

Nai

Man

di

po

lice

cu

sto

dy.

Fam

ily

wai

ted

o

uts

ide

till

eve

nin

g f

or

rele

ase.

Lat

er

hea

rd t

hat

Nad

eem

was

sh

ow

n t

o h

ave

fled

po

lice

cu

sto

dy

on

6.9

.20

17.

Fam

ily

sen

t le

tter

s to

NH

RC

, p

oli

ce o

ffici

als

thro

ug

h f

ax.

3 F

IRs

(039

6/1

7, 0

397/

17 &

0

398

/17)

re

late

d t

o t

he

inci

den

t fi

led

ag

ain

st N

adee

m a

nd

an

u

nk

no

wn

acc

use

d i

n P

S K

akro

li,

Dis

tric

t M

uza

ffar

nag

ar u

/s 3

07

&

414

IP

C,

25(3

) o

f A

rms

Act

19

59.

A p

ost

mo

rtem

was

co

nd

uct

ed,

Nad

eem

’s f

amil

y is

no

t aw

are

of

any

furt

her

in

vest

igat

ion

bei

ng

ca

rrie

d o

ut

by

the

po

lice

. P

ost

M

ort

em R

epo

rt h

as n

ot

bee

n

giv

en t

o t

he

fam

ily.


V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

on

th

e b

od

y

Fa

mil

y t

est

imo

ny

L

eg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

9.

Ikra

m @

To

la s

/o

Mu

nsh

i

11th

Au

gu

st,

2017

Pla

ce:

Kai

ran

a B

y-p

ass,

nea

r B

anja

ra

Bas

ti,

Dis

t S

ham

li,

UP

.

Po

lice

go

t in

form

atio

n t

hat

2

crim

inal

s h

ave

loo

ted

a b

ike.

Po

lice

set

up

bar

rica

des

to

ap

-p

reh

end

th

e cr

imin

als.

Tw

o p

eop

le o

n a

mo

torc

ycle

, tr

ied

to

flee

aft

er s

eein

g t

he

po

lice

, ch

ased

by

the

po

lice

, m

oto

rcyc

le l

ost

bal

ance

an

d

fell

, cr

imin

als

fire

d g

un

sh

ots

at

po

lice

, p

oli

ce fi

red

in

sel

f d

e-fe

nce

.

On

e cr

imin

al i

nju

red

, id

enti

-fi

ed h

imse

lf a

s Ik

ram

, t

aken

to

C

HC

, K

aira

na,

su

ccu

mb

ed t

o

inju

ries

, th

e o

ther

acc

use

d e

s-ca

ped

, h

e w

as i

den

tifi

ed a

s S

hak

il b

y Ik

ram

.

Co

. A

nk

ush

Go

dar

a &

Co

. R

agh

u R

aj S

ing

h i

nju

red

by

bu

llet

s o

f th

e ac

cuse

d.

Sen

t to

C

HC

, K

aira

na

for

trea

tmen

t.

As

per

th

e F

IR,

15 p

oli

ce o

ffi-

cial

s o

f P

S K

aira

na,

PS

Ko

twal

i an

d o

ffici

als

of

SW

AT

Tea

m

invo

lved

in

th

e p

oli

ce a

ctio

n.

As

per

th

e P

M R

epo

rt,

he

had

5 b

ull

et w

ou

nd

s o

n h

is

rig

ht

kn

ee,

rig

ht

thig

h,

rig

ht

foo

t, l

eft

kn

ee,

left

fo

ot

and

3 f

ract

ure

s o

n h

is

rig

ht

leg

. B

lack

enin

g f

ou

nd

ar

ou

nd

th

e g

un

sho

t w

ou

nd

s in

dic

ate

clo

se

ran

ge

fire

.

As

per

Ik

ram

’s f

amil

y, h

is

bo

dy

also

had

sev

ere

wo

un

ds

of

tort

ure

. H

is r

ibs

and

arm

wer

e b

rok

en a

nd

h

e h

ad a

hu

ge

inju

ry o

n t

he

bac

k o

f h

is h

ead

.

Ikra

m’s

wif

e te

stifi

es t

hat

on

10

.08

.20

17

Ikra

m h

ad g

on

e to

a h

osp

ital

in

Bag

hp

at

wit

h h

is y

ou

ng

er s

on

, to

ch

eck

on

a r

ela-

tive

. A

t n

oo

n,

on

10

.8.2

017

, S

hak

eel,

Su

nil

an

d 5

-6 o

ther

men

cam

e to

Ik

ram

’s

ho

use

an

d w

ere

info

rmed

by

his

wif

e th

at I

kra

m w

as i

n t

he

ho

spit

al. T

hey

vis

-it

ed t

he

ho

spit

al,

and

to

ok

Ik

ram

wit

h

them

. S

ajid

, Ik

ram

’s m

ino

r so

n i

s a

wit

-n

ess

to t

his

.

On

11.

8.2

017

, fa

mil

y g

ot

to k

no

w t

hro

ug

h

soci

al m

edia

(w

hat

sap

p)

that

Ik

ram

has

b

een

kil

led

in

an

‘en

cou

nte

r’. H

er m

ino

r so

ns

wer

e th

reat

ened

by

the

po

lice

wh

en

they

had

go

ne

to t

he

po

lice

sta

tio

n t

o

inq

uir

e ab

ou

t th

e d

eath

of

thei

r fa

ther

.

3 F

IRs

(78

5/20

17,

786

/20

17,

787/

2017

) P

S K

aira

na,

Sh

amli

D

istr

ict

dat

ed 1

1.8

.20

17 u

/s

307

IPC

an

d S

ec 2

5 A

rms

Act

ag

ain

st

Ikra

m &

Sh

akee

l.

Inve

stig

atio

n o

f 3

FIR

s tr

ans-

ferr

ed t

o S

HO

Um

esh

Ro

riya

, P

S

Kan

dh

la

by

SP

, S

ham

li.

Inq

ues

t p

roce

edin

gs

u/s

174

C

rpc

un

der

tak

en,

PM

an

d v

ide-

og

rap

hy

do

ne.

Fin

al r

epo

rt h

as b

een

file

d o

n

the

FIR

No

. 78

5/17

, 78

6/1

7 an

d

787/

17 o

n t

he

gro

un

d t

hat

Ik

ram

su

ccu

mb

ed t

o h

is i

nju

ries

an

d

the

acco

mp

lice

cal

led

Sh

akee

l co

uld

no

t b

e id

enti

fied

, st

ate-

men

ts o

f re

sid

ents

of

Haj

ipu

r M

oh

alla

say

ing

th

at n

ob

od

y ca

lled

sh

akee

l li

ves

in t

hat

are

a.

45


46

CASE MEMORANDUM – SHAMIM S/O FAKRU, R/O VILLAGE SISONA, PS CHAPAR,

DIST – MUZAFFARNAGAR, UP.

Context:

On 30.12.2017, the newspaper reported that Jansath police officials claimed to have killed Shamim, a criminal with an award oh his head in a police encounter. The SWAT Team Muzaffarnagar and Special Cell Delhi Po-lice had information that Shamim alongwith his accomplices are planning to come to Jansath and commit road robbery in a Swift car. It was stated that the criminals fired at the police and the police had to open fire in self defence. An FIR was registered against Shamim mentioning a similar sequence of events. However, family’s narration of the sequence of events before and after the alleged encounter raises serious doubt about the police story.

Following are the major points which calls for an urgent intervention and an independent investigation into this case:

Family Narrative: Unfolding of the incident

Shamim’s father, Fakru states that Shamim had loaned Rs. 1 Lakh to his relative Akram s/o Abban. When Shamim asked Akram to pay his debt, Akram started creating a pressure on Shamim and on one instance had even tried to get Shamim arrested by official of PS Jansath, luckily Shamim was not at home that day. Fakru alleges that Akram was in constant touch with police officers from PS Jansath who would call and insist Akram to get Shamim arrested. Two months before the alleged encounter, Akram was speaking to police officers of PS Jansath, which was heard by Shamim’s sister, Sabiha and other members of the family. The fam-ily thus alleges that Akram in connivance with the police officers of PS Jansath have planned and killed Shamim in an alleged police encounter. How family got to know about the incident:

Family states that they got to know about the alleged encounter on the morning of 31st December, 2017 through the local newspapers. They were not informed about their son’s death by the police. Torture marks on the body: Fakru states that when they received Shamim’s body after the post mortem, it had marks of torture on it. Fur-ther the Post Mortem Report records two bullet injuries, one bullet which entered the body from the back of the head and exited the body from the forehead and the second bullet which entered his body from his right temple and exited at an angle from his left temple. The following fact completly falsifies the police version of the incident according to which the accused was shot while sitting in a car from the front. Legal Recourse taken by the family:

Family states that the police has been pressuring them since the encounter and even asked them to sign on some papers. Due to fear of possible police backlash, and the struggle of survival that the family is undergo-ing, the family has not pursued any legal action against the police officials so far.

Police Version of the alleged encounter as stated in the FIR:

The FIR has been recorded on the statment of SO Anil Kumar Singh, PS Jansath, Muzaffarnagar. As per the FIR, the SWAT Team Muzaffarnagar and Special Cell Delhi Police had information that Shamim alongwith his accomplices are planning to come to Jansath and commit road robbery in a Swift car. A team of police officials comprising of 3 police officials of Jansath PS, led by the SHO; 3 officials of SWAT Team Muzaffarna-gar, and 11 officials of the Special Cell Delhi Police, reached the spot, waiting to stop the criminals. A swift car was spotted, when asked to stop, the driver after stopping the car, started firing at the police, and ran in the opposite direction. Shamim who was sitting on the front seat, next to the driver also fired at the police. Police fired in self defence, Shamim was injured inside the car. Co Ashok Khari got injured in the cross firing, both were taken to CHC Jansath, where Shamim succumbed to his injuries. The other assailant managed to escape.

ANNEXE - 2


Investigation by State authorities: 3 FIRs (840/17, 841/17, 842/17) were filed on 31.12.2017 in PS Jansath, Dist - Muzaffarnagar, u/s 307, 414 IPC, Sec 25/27 of Arms Act and Sec 41/102 CrPC against Shamim and another unknown accused person. Post Mortem was conducted and the Post Mortem Report was given to the family members. The Family is not aware of any further investigation done by the police. The family however states that their statements have not been taken by any police officer or any other authority as yet and neither have they received any summons from the Court for a Judicial Inquiry.

Violation of Guidelines laid down by Supreme Court in People’s Union of Civil Liberties vs. State of Maharashtra, (2014)10SCC635 :

Nadeem’s family was not informed by the police about the killing of Nadeem in a police encounter, as is mandated by the above mentioned guideline. Infact as stated above, the family got to know from media reports published the next day about the alleged encounter.

FIR was registered against the victim which is alleged to be false and fabricated as per Nadeem’s family. No FIR/inquiry has been initiated against the policemen involved in the alleged encounter.

The investigation of the case has not been transferred to the CBCID or any other independent investi-gation agency, as mandated by the Supreme Court guideline.

A report of the Magisterial inquiry must mandatorily be sent to a Judicial Magistrate of competent ju-risdiction for inquiry, in all cases of death which occur in the course of police firing. The family has not received any summons from the Court and is thus, not aware if an inquiry by a Judicial Magistrate has been held, as is mandated by the Supreme Court.

Points raising doubts on police version: The following points raise serious doubts about the police version of the encounter:

Marks of torture on Shamim’s body as noticed by his family members falsifies the police version.

It is more interesting to note that the Post Mortem Report records two bullet injuries, one bullet which entered the body from the back of the head and exited the body from the forehead and the second bullet which entered his body from his right temple and exited at an angle from his left temple. The following fact proves that the sequence of events as naraated by the police in the FIR is false. The FIR states that Shamim was sitting on the front seat of his car, next to the drivers seat when he was shot from the front.

The FIR itself points towards many lapses. It is pertinent of note that inspite of the presence of 17 po-lice officials who were present at the spot, the second accused managed to escape on foot, while firing at the police, after stopping the car.

Further, the police state that they together fired 10 gun shots at the accused. The FIR then states that a 9mm pistol used by the accused was recovered from inside the car and some bullet shells fired by the accused. The FIR is silent on the number of bullet shells fired by the accused which was recovered by the police. The FIR further does not make any mention of recovery of bullet shells fired by the police pistols.

Further, the FIR states that a bullet fired by the accused who managed to escape, hit the bullet proof jacket of Co. 1037 Amit. The FIR however, does not state that the bullet proof jacket was seized and parcelled for necessary investigation.

A cursory look at the points mentioned by the family contradict the police version of the alleged encounter and raise a prima facie doubt about the veracity of the claims made by the police. A detailed, fair and impar-tial investigation is therefore required in the present case to bring out the true and correct facts of the alleged encounter.

47


48

CASE MEMORANDUM – ASLAM S/O MAUSAM ALI, VILLAGE BUNTA, PS GARHI PUKHTA, DISTRICT SHAMLI, UP.

Context: It was reported in media that Aslam, a dreaded gangster, was killed in a police encounter on 09.12.2017. The police was alerted about the activities of 2 criminals who were roaming in Dadri to commit loot and robbery. As per the news report the police spotted the two criminals and tried to stop them when they accelerated their bike to abscond. It was stated that the criminals fired at the police and the police had to open fire in self defence. An FIR was registered against Aslam and another unknown accused persons mentioning a similar sequence of events. However, family’s narration of the sequence of events before and after the alleged en-counter raises serious doubt about the police story.

Following are the major points which calls for an urgent intervention and an independent investigation into

this case:

Family Narrative: context

Aslam s/o Mausam Ali and Ramzani s/o Shafiq had started residing in Village Boodhiya Chungi, Jagadari, Dis-trict Yamunanagar, in the state of Haryana alongwith their families, working as manual labourers. While Ramzani was released from prison 7 months ago, Aslam had 2-3 cases of loot and theft registered against him. Aslam’s family states that a few days before Aslam was killed, he had gone to visit a lawyer as he wanted to surrender in Court, in the cases that were registered against him. Aslam’s family thus raises the question that when Aslam was intending to surrender before the court, why would he go and commit a crime as alleged in the police story.

Unfolding of the incident as per family narrative:

Israna, Aslam’s wife states that on the morning of 7th December, 2017 some men took away Aslam and Ram-

zani (encountered by the police on 8th December, 2017) on the pretext that they will help them to surrender in

Court in the cases registered against them.

How family got to know about the incident:

Aslam’s family states that Sattar, Aslam’s cousin, received a call from some police official on the night of 9th

December, 2017, asking for details about Aslam, such as the name of his village etc. The policeman however,

did not inform him about Aslam’s killing. Soon, family got the news through the Pradhan (Village Headman)

of the village that Aslam has been killed by Noida police, while Ramzani has been killed by Aligarh police.

The same night, Aslam’s family reached the hospital where post-mortem of his body was conducted, but his

family was not given any receipt or post-mortem report from the hospital. Aslam’s body was given to his fami-

ly at around 4.00 am on 10th December, 2017 and his family was escorted by heavy police personnel vehicles

to their village and the police parties stayed till the body was buried. Aslam’s family have not been provided

with a copy of the FIR registered against Aslam, post mortem report and other documents pertaining to his

death as yet.

Torture marks on the body:

Israna, Aslam’s wife further states that when the body of Aslam was brought home, they realised during the

preparations for the body’s burial that his body had severe torture marks. His back was blue, as a result of

beatings, and his arm and legs were fractured. The family thus questions the police version, stating that the

police had tortured Aslam before killing him.


Legal Recourse taken by the family:

On 29th March, 2018 Aslam’s wife Israna has sent a representation to the National Commission on Minorities,

New Delhi narrating the facts leading upto Aslam’s alleged killing in police action. Due to fear of possible po-

lice backlash, and the struggle of survival that the family is undergoing after the death of its primary bread

winner, the family has not pursued any legal action against the police officials.

Investigation by State authorities:

FIR No. 1083/2017 has been filed in Dadri Police Station, District Gautambudh Nagar, against Aslam and an-

other unknown accused for attempt to murder (Section 307 Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860). On 24.03.2018, a

summon under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 was sent to Mausam Ali (Aslam’s

father) directing him to present himself before the Crime Detection Branch, Noida, District Gautambudh Na-

gar for recording of his statement, in the abovementioned FIR. In a reply dated 30.03.2018, sent to the Crime

Detection Branch, Noida, and the Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Tehsil Dadri, by Aslam’s wife, requesting

the officials to get her statement recorded by women police officers at her residence as per available provi-

sions in law, as she is observing Iddat. The letter also states that Aslam’s father is very old and a heart patient

and thus cannot travel to the police station to give his statement. Israna has further stated in the letter, that

her family has not yet been provided the copy of the FIR registered against her husband and the Post Mortem

Report of his body.

Violation of Guidelines laid down by Supreme Court in People’s Union of Civil Liberties vs. State of

Maharashtra, (2014)10SCC635 :

Aslam’s family was not informed by the police about the killing of Aslam in a police encounter, as is mandated by the above mentioned guideline.

FIR was registered against the victim which is alleged to be false and fabricated as per Aslam’s family.

No FIR/inquiry has been initiated against the policemen involved in the alleged encounter.

The investigation of the case has not been transferred to the CBCID or any other independent investi-

gation agency, as mandated by the Supreme Court guideline.

The FIR and Post Mortem Report and other documents pertaining of Aslam’s death have not been

made available to his family as yet, inspite of multiple attempts made by them.



As per reports published in the newspaper pertaining to the alleged police encounter of Aslam, on 9th De-cember, 2017, the police officials of Dadri police station, District Gautambudh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh were alerted of two criminals who were roaming in Dadri to commit loot and robbery. The police had put up barri-cades to apprehend the criminals. As per the report the police spotted the two criminals on their motorcycles and tried to stop them. On being stopped, the criminals accelerated their bike in an attempt to flee from the police. When the police followed the criminals, they started firing at the police officials, who fired back in self defence. The cross firing continued for about 15 minutes, in which, one criminal was injured, and eventually died in the hospital during his treatment. His companion, whose identity could not be ascertained, was suc-cessful in running away during the police action. The injured assailant was identified as Aslam, after the en-counter, during police investigation. Aslam had received 2 bullet injuries, including one in the head. During the cross firing, Inspector Saurav received a bullet injury on his thighs and Constable Vikas was hit on his leg. The police recovered one pistol, one country made pistol and a motorcycle from the scene of crime. The po-lice have also alleged that Aslam was a known criminal who had a reward of Rs. 65000 on him.


49


50

CASE MEMORANDUM – RAMZANI S/O SHAFIQ, R/O VILLAGE BOODHIYA CHUNGI, JAGADARI,

DISTRICT YAMUNANAGAR, HARYANA.

Context:

On 08.12.2017, it was reported in media that Ramzani, was killed in a police encounter by police officials of PS

Akbarabad, Aligarh. However, family’s narration of the sequence of events before and after the alleged en-

counter raises serious doubt about the police story. Following are the major points which calls for an urgent

intervention and an independent investigation into this case:


Ramzani’s wife, Salman states that Ramzani alongwith Salma and their children, mother etc and Aslam’s fam-

ily were residing at village Budhiya Chungi, Jagadari, Dist – Yamunanagar, working as manual labourers. On

the morning of 7.12.2017, some men took away Aslam and Ramzani on the pretext that they will help them in

surrendering before the Court in the cases registered against them.


In the morning of 9.12.2017, Salma’s brother, Anees received a call from officials of Aligarh Police who stated

that Ramzani was killed in an encounter. Salma states in her testimony that the police must have asked Ram-

zani for her brother’s number while torturing him.


Salma states that there were marks of torture on Ramzani’s body and his hands and legs were also fractured.

It also seemed to them that he died due to the torture and he was shot after he had died. His clothes did not

have any bullet marks on them.


Due to fear of possible police backlash, and the struggle of survival that the family is undergoing, the family

has not pursued any legal action against the police officials so far.


Police got information about criminals looting a car. They setup barricades to apprehend the criminals. The

Criminals fired gun shots at police and the police fired in self defence. While one criminal was injured and

taken to hospital. He later succumbed to injuries and the other two accused escaped who could not be identi-

fied. A Sub-Inspector also received a bullet injury in the cross firing.


An FIR was registered in PS Akrabad, Aligarh against Ramzani. The family did not have any documents/any

other information about the case.



FIR was registered against the victim which is alleged to be false and fabricated as per Mansoor’s fami-

ly. No FIR/inquiry has been initiated against the policemen involved in the alleged encounter.



A report of the Magisterial inquiry must mandatorily be sent to a Judicial Magistrate of competent ju-

risdiction for inquiry, in all cases of death which occur in the course of police firing. The family has not

received any summons from the Court and is thus, not aware if an inquiry by a Judicial Magistrate has

been held, as is mandated by the Supreme Court.

51


CASE MEMORANDUM – FURQAN S/O MIR HASSAN, VILL- TITARWARA, P.S.- KAIRANA, DISTT.-

SHAMLI, UP.

Context:

It was reported in media that Furqan, a dreaded gangster, was killed in a police encounter on 22.10.2017. It

was stated that the criminals fired at the police and the police had to open fire in self defence. An FIR was

registered against Furqan and other unknown accused persons mentioning a similar sequence of events.

However, family’s narration of the sequence of events before and after the alleged encounter raises serious

doubt about the police story.


this case:


As per the statement of Furqan’s family, on 22.10.2017 at about 4.00 p.m., Furqan had gone to meet his wife

and sons at Akbar Masjid, Pathan Kot, P.S. Baraut, District-Baghpat. When he along with his wife and chil-

dren reached Delhi Bus Stand, Baraut, to meet his brother-in-law Farukh, the following police officers came

and detained Furqan along with Anees s/o Mushtaq (Furqan’s Counsin Brother) and Rahul s/o Ramesh - Sta-

tion House Officer (SHO), P.S. Budhana, District-Muzaffar Nagar, Chaman Singh Chawra; Sub-Inspector (SI)

Soveer Nagar; SI Adesh Tyagi; Constable (Co.) 1368 Harvendra Singh; Co. 398 Waqar; Driver Co. Sushil Tyagi,

all police personnel of P.S. Budhana and SI Majid Ali; Co. 1184 Kalu Ram; Co. 1505 Aditya; SI Yogendra Singh;

Co. Naveen Kumar; Co. Romish Kumar; Co. Atul Tyagi; Co. Vikas Kumar; Co. Vivek Kumar, all members of

Special Task Force (STF), District- Muzaffar Nagar.


The three of them were taken in a police jeep. While Anees and Rahul were taken to PS Shahpur, Furqan was

taken to the fields near Badakta Canal Bridge, PS Budhana where Furqan was killed and later on it was shown

as a fake encounter, for which an FIR was filed against Furqan and unknown accused persons on 23.10.2017 in

PS Budhana, District MuzaffarNagar. In the FIR Furqan is shown to be a dreaded gansgter who had an award

of Rs. 50,000 on his head. This is contested by Mir Hassan (Furqan’s father) who states that there was no re-

ward on Furqan’s head prior to the encounter, he was not wanted in any case and that Furqan had been let

out on bail a month before his encounter and he was residing with his wife and children in the past one

month.


Some villagers informed Meer Hassan and Akbari (parents of Furqan) about Furqan’s alleged encounter; and

Anees and Rahul also being fired upon by police personnel and shown as being arrested. Thereafter, Furqan’s

father Meer Hasan tried his best to obtain a copy of the documents relating to Furqan’s death as well as the

postmortem report. The Post Mortem Report has not been made available to Meer Hasan till date, almost 6

months after the death of Furqan. Thereafter, Meer Hassan met Anees and Rahul in jail, who narrated the

entire incident. In the meanwhile, other sons Meer Hassan were also being threatened regularly by the ac-

cused police personnels, stating that if Furqan’s family takes any action against the police, they will also be

killed in a similar manner.

Legal Recourse taken by the family and the threats received by them:

Inspite of living under the regular threat of these policemen, Meer Hassan moved applications before various

authorities narrating the facts about the fake encounter in which his son was killed and about the threats be-


52

ing extended to him and his other sons by the same police personnel who had murdered Furqan. Meer Has-

san filed applications before S.D.M. Tehsil-Budhana, District Muzaffar Nagar; Director General of Police,

Government of U.P., S.S.P. Muzaffar Nagar, Station House Officer, P.S. Budhana, District-Muzaffar Nagar. On

17.11.2017 a similar application was filed before the Chairman, National Human Right Commission, New Delhi.

No action was taken by the said authorities, and finding no other alternative, Meer Hassan filed an applica-

tion u/s. 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the C.J.M. Muzaffar Nagar, which was registered as Case No.809/11 of 2017 on

19.12.2017, for registration of an FIR against the accused police personnel.

Immediately after filing the application u/s. 156(3) Cr.P.C., the accused police personnel started building pres-

sure upon on Meer Hassan to withdraw the case. On 24.01.2018, Meer Hassan filed a complaint before the

Chairman of National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi, Case No. 3788/24/57/2018, in which he had

stated that Munawwar and Tasawwar (sons of Meer Hassan) who were doing pairvi in the 156(3) application,

were called upon along with Rahul and Anees, who were eyewitness of Furqan’s murder and were threatened

by the police personnels stating that Anees and Rahul, who are currently in jail, will be killed during their

production before the court on remand, by showing that they were trying to escape and Meer Hasan’s other

sons will also meet the same fate. On 15.02.2018, NHRC passed an Order vide which the complaint was sent to

SSP Muzaffar Nagar, to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action

taken in the matter. Meer Hasan has not received any response from the SSP Muzaffar Nagar as yet.

Further, on 09.01.2017, about 10 months earlier to Furqan’s murder, Meer Hasan had filed another complaint

before the Chairman of Human Rights Commission, New Delhi (Case No. 1262/24/64/2017) stating that he

has received information that his son Tasawwar and son of his brother-in-law, Bilal will be killed in a police

encounter as they were put under illegal custody by police authorities and they were regularly being tortured.

On 20.09.2017, the Commission passed an Order directing the concerned authorities to appear in person on

03.11.2017 to produce the required information/documents pertaining to the case, after multiple reminders

failed to evoke response. Furqan was killed in a fake encounter 12 days before the date on which his father’s

complaint had led to the police authorities being summoned before the NHRC.

On 16.01.2018, CJM Muzaffar Nagar dismissed the application u/s. 156(3) Cr.P.C. filed by Meer Hasan on the

ground that a magisterial inquiry by SDM Budhana is underway and that the documents show that Furqan

was a criminal with 8 cases registered against him. The order was passed in violation of the Guidelines of the

Supreme Court applicable in such cases. A Criminal Revision Petition (C.R. No. 1222/2018) is currently pend-

ing before the High Court of Allahabad against the order passed by the CJM Muzaffar Nagar.

Meer Hasan and his entire family including his relatives, are being regularly threatened by the police person-

nel who were involved in killing his son. Recently, Meer Hassan’s nephew, Intezar, (and Anees’s brother) was

made a tool to harass him. Intezar’s father, Mustaq (Anees’s father) has a house near the house of Meer Ha-

san. Intezar was shown to be involved in FIR No. 2 of 2017, in which a process was said to be issued against

Intezar s/o Mushtaq u/s 82 Cr.P.C. It is relevant to mention that Intezar and his father Mushtaq have not

been residing at the address of village Titarwara. This fact is known to police, but, still when the process was

tried to be served on 30.03.2018, Meer Hasan was forced to receive it. Upon his refusal, the copy of notice u/s.

82 Cr.P.C. was forcefully pasted on Meer Hasan’s door and a drum beat pronouncement was also made in

front of house by the police officials.



FIR was registered against the victim which is alleged to be false and fabricated as per Furqan’s family.

No FIR/inquiry has been initiated against the policemen involved, inspite of the letters/representations

sent by Mir Hassan to various police, state and national authorities.



53


The Post Mortem Report and other documents pertaining of Furqan death has not been made available

to his family as yet, inspite of multiple attempts made by them.


risdiction for inquiry. The same has not been done even 6 months after the killing of Furqan.

Even though Mir Hasan had sent a letter to NHRC apprising them about the partial and malafide role

of the police in investigating the case, there has been no response from NHRC, which is mandated in

cases raising serious doubt about independant and impartial investigation.

Chargesheet under Section 173 CrPC has not yet been filed by the police, 6 months after the incident.

The Guidelines state that if family members of the victim find that the procedure laid down by the

Court has not been followed or there exists a pattern of abuse or lack of independent investigation or

impartiality by any of the functionaries of the State, then it may make a complaint to the Sessions

Judge having territorial jurisdiction over the place of incident. Upon such complaint being made, the

concerned Sessions Judge shall look into the merits of the complaint and address the grievances raised

therein. When the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar was not competent to decide the 156(3)

application filed by Mir Hassan in light of the above guidelines, he should have referred the matter to

the Sessions Judge for proper enquiry and redressal of the grievances. Instead the CJM dismissed the

application of Mir Hasan taking a shallow view of the matter and in violation of the SC guidelines.


F.I.R. No. 797/2017, 798/2017, 799/2017 and 800/2017 was lodged on 23.10.2017 in PS Budhana, District MuzaffarNagar, u/s. 147,148,149,307, 414 and 411 I.P.C., 1860; Section 41 and 102 CrPC and Section 3, 25, 27 and Section 4/ 25 Arms Act,1959 against Furqan and unknown accused persons.

Police have stated in the FIR that SI Sobir Nagar with other officials were at a check post when 5 persons on 2

motorcycles were seen coming from Barot road, police threw torch light and gesticulate them to stop on

which they fire two shots on police men and ran away. Police followed the criminals in their jeep but the mo-

torcycles disappeared near village Bitawada. In the meanwhile, the STF team who were already in search of

these criminals arrived and accompanied police team. A man informed the police that some criminals were

seen near poultry farm. Police divided themselves into two parties one under supervision of SI Yogendra

Singh and other under SI Sobir Nagar. To seize the criminals police formed a blockade, when they saw 5 crim-

inals with 2 bikes. When police asked them to surrender, 2 criminals ran away on their bike and other 3 ran

into the sugarcane field and started firing on police. At around 22:30 police started firing back and after 15

minutes of firing, police went close and caught them, in which SI Adesh Tyagi and Co. Harvendar got injured.

Meanwhile two criminals fled away and one who got injured fell down in the fields. Co. Kaluram and Co. Ad-

itya confirmed that the injured criminal is Furqan s/o Mir Hassan, a wanted criminal. Later he was sent for

treatment to CHC Budhana.

Points raising doubts on police version: It is interesting to note that even though 4 guns were recovered from the scene of crime which have been

stated to be used by the criminals for firing on the police party, the police were able to recover only 5 bullet

shells of the gun shots fired by the criminals. The FIR states that the firing between the police and criminals

lasted for around 15 minutes, in which the criminals shot at the police indiscriminately. At the same time,

while 20 gun shots were fired by the police on the criminals, recovery was made of only 10 9mm pistols used

by the police officers. The FIR offers no explanation as to why the other bullet shells could not be recovered.

Further, it is stated in the FIR that one bullet fired by the criminals hit the bullet proof jacket of SI Sobir Na-

gar. There is no mention of the bullet proof jacket being seized and parcelled for investigation. The FIR is also

silent about the nature of injuries received by the the two police officers who got injured in the cross firing

and the nature of injuries received by Furqan.

A cursory look at the points mentioned above raise a prima facie doubt about the veracity of the claims made

by the police. A detailed, fair and impartial investigation is therefore required in the present case to bring out

the true and correct facts of the alleged encounter.


54

CASE MEMORANDUM – SUMIT KUMAR S/O KARAM CHAND, R/O JAINUDDIN CHIRCHITA, PS

SINGHAWALI AHIR, DIST – BAGHPAT, UP.

Context:

On 03.10.2017, in Uttar Pradesh's Baghpat district, Karam Chand learned that his son, Sumit Kumar, had been

killed in a shootout with the police.The FIR lodged by the police said Sumit and an accomplice had robbed a

bank and escaped. The police, the FIR said, spotted them the next day and Sumit was killed in a shootout that

followed. However, family’s narration of the sequence of events before and after the alleged encounter raises

serious doubt about the police story.


this case:


Sumit’s father Karam Chand states that Sumit was a 25 year old boy, living with his parents and helping his

father in farming. He did not have any cases registered against him before the alleged encounter and no re-

ward was declared on him prior to the incident.


Karam Chand states that on 30.09.2017 at around 10.00 am, Sumit had gone to Balauni after he got a call from

an unknown number and was called there. Upon reaching Balauni, Sumit was standing at a shop whose own-

er he knew and made a call from the owner’s mobile phone to the unknown number from which he had got a

call. Suddenly, 6-7 people in plain clothes came and abducted Sumit in a car and fled towards Baghpat.

Karam Chand states that Sumit’s adbuction was witnessed by many people standing there. When the family

got to know about Sumit’s kidnapping they went to different police stations, but they got no information

about Sumit. Karam Chand states that he tried to give a complaint to PS. Balauni, Singhwali Ahir and SP

Baghpat, but they did not take his complaint and no investigation was conducted. On 2.10.2017, Baghpat po-

lice told Sumit’s family that Sumit is in police custody and is being questioned regarding FIR No. 394/2017

dated 20.9.2017 registered in PS Ecotech – III, NOIDA. Karam Chand further states that FIR No. 394/17 does

not name Sumit as an accused. (the FIR is registered against unknown persons). When the family members

requested the Bagpat police that they be allowed to meet him, Bagpat police told them that Sumit is not in

their custody, and that he is being questioned by police officials from different teams regarding cases of loot

registered against him. Bagpat police however assured the family that Sumit will be let off by 3.10.2017.

On the night of 2.10.2017, NOIDA police came to Sumit’s house and took away all his identification docu-

ments such as Aadhar Card and Sumit’s mobile phone box. When Sumit’s family tried to ask the NOIDA Po-

lice regarding Sumit’s whereabouts, they threatened the family and stated that they will pick up all the mem-

bers of the family and encounter them in different places.


On the morning of 3.10.2017, Karam Chand got to know from his relatives and through newspaper that Sumit

has been declared absconding by the police in a case registered against him and a reward was announced on

him. Karam Chand states that on hearing this news, they suspected that the NOIDA police has taken Sumit

and will kill Sumit in a fake encounter. In the afternoon of 3.10.2017, Praveen, Sumit’s brother faxed complaint

letters to DGP, UP Police, Chief Minister, UP, National Human Rights Commission. A complaint was also

sent to Mr. Luv Kumar, SSP NOIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar, UP, however no investigation was conducted. In

the night of 3.10.2017, Sumit’s family got to know from NOIDA News Channels that Mr. Luv Kumar, SSP

NOIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar has issued a press statment stating that officials of PS Kasna and Bisrakh and

other officials were conducting a joint operation in which Sumit was killed in an encounter and 3 other un-

known accused managed to escape. The news report also stated that Sumit was a gangster who was abscond-

55


ing from the police in cases of murder and dacoity and had an award of Rs. 50,000 on his head.

Post Mortem and Torture marks on the body:

Karam Chand also states that after the alleged encounter, the police officials were refusing to give Sumit’s

body to the family members. The family had to protest outside the Mortuary in Sector 94 NOIDA and

stopped the traffic at Mahamaya Flyover. Only then did the police give Sumit’s body to his family. When the

family saw Sumit’s body, it had grave marks of torture on it. His back bone, arms and legs were broken, and

his left eye was was grieviously mutilated. His neck and back had blue injury marks.

As per PM Report he had one bullet injury on left side of his chest, and a bullet was recovered from his chest

cage. There was also an abrasion on his right shoulder blade region, below shoulder line. Sumit’s family has

been given one page of the PM report. They have been meeting and writing to several government/police offi-

cials to get PM report.


Sumit’s family wrote a complaint letter to City Magistrate, NOIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar, for initiating inquiry

prooceedings against the police officers involved in killing their son, but they received no response. On

17.10.2017, the family again wrote complaint letters to SP Baghpat, SSP Gautam Budh Nagar, City Magistrate

NOIDA, IG Police, Meerut. Since the family got no response, an application u/s 165(3) was filed before the

CJM, Baghpat on 23.10.2017 for filing an FIR against the police officers.. On 3.11.2017, the application was dis-

missed by the CJM Bagpat, stating that the said application should be filed in District Gautambudh Nagar.

Thereafter an application u/s 156(3) was filed in NOIDA Court, which dismissed and the case is currently

pending in the Allahabad High Court.

The National Human Rights Commission took suo moto cognisance of the matter in case number -

30160/24/30/2017-AD and issued notice to the SSP and District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar to submit

postmortem report, inquest report, findings of the magisterial enquiry report/enquiry by senior officers dis-

closing (a) names and designation of police officials, if found responsible for the death; (b) whether use of

force was justified and action taken was lawful; (c) result of the forensic examination of ‘handwash’ of the

deceased to ascertain the presence of residue of gun powder to justify exercise of right of self-defence; and (d)

report of ballistic expert on examination of the weapons alleged to have been used by the deceased and his

companions. Pursuant to the directions of the Commission, communications were received from S.P.

(Human Rights), Uttar Pradesh and Under Secretary to the Government of U.P. through which copies of FIR

and post mortem report had been forwarded. The SSP and District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar have now

been directed to submit the remaining reports mentioned above.

Pressure on the family, threats and counter cases:

On 02.10.2017, when police had declared Sumit as absconding, his family was asked for Rs. 3,50,000 as bribe

through a mediator if they want the police to release Sumit. After the encounter, police has been meeting

family’s relatives through some mediators in order to get them to compromise on the case. Sumit’s family also

reports that they are being continuously followed and intimidated. Some time after the encounter, Sumit’s

brother Raj Singh and Pravin were implicated in a case false for charges of rape and dacoity. A lady who runs

a canteen in Subharti Hospital/University was the victim and one Ajay Sharma was the complainant. Family

has got a stay on the matter from HC.

Promotion of Police Officers accused of Murder:

Sumit’s family states that Jitender Kumar was among those who encountered Sumit. He has now been pro-

moted from SHO of PS Kasna to DSP Meerut.


56


The FIR states that SHO Jitendra Kumar got to know from an informer that criminals armed with .315 bore

rifle and other arms are roaming around in a Swift Car neat ATS roundabout. The Rifle was reported to be

stolen from PS Ecotech-III. SHO PS Kasna alongwith 6 other police officials all armed with pistols and rifles

and bullets alongwith SHO PS Sector 58, Anil Pratap Singh alongwith 2 police officials also armed and SO PS

Bisrakh Ajay Kumar Sharma, alongwith 5 other police officials all armed reached the ATS Chowk to look for

the criminals. They saw 4 people holding guns were standing near a Swift Car. When the police spotted them,

they fired at the police and ran away in their car. Police chased them in their vehicles. The criminals fired at

the police vehicles, SHO PS Kasna fired one bullet in retaliatory firing which hit the Swift car’s glass and the

car got disbalanced and crashed in the gate of a colony. The criminals got out of the car and started firing at

the police party. Police officers demanded the criminals to surrender, but they instead intensified the firing.

One bullet each fired by the criminals hit the bullet proof jacket of SHO Sector 58 and SO Bisrakh and SI Sat-

ish Kumar got injured with the bullet fired by the criminals. Thereafter, police officials fired 5 bullets at the

criminals. One criminal got injured in the police firing and the 3 others managed to escape. The injured crim-

inal and SI Satish Kumar were sent to District Hospital, Gautambudh Nagar for treatment. The injured crimi-

nal was declared dead by the doctors in the hospital. A wallet was recovered from the criminal’s pocket which

contained his Voter ID Card. The criminal was identified as Sumit s/o Karam Singh. The FIR surther states

that the Forensic team was called to the scene of crime, who secured it with a yellow tape and the forensic

team was directed to visit the District Hospital to take the finger swabs of the accused. The FIR states that the

following items were recovered from the spot from the accused– 1 pistol .32 bore, with 2 live catridges inside

the magazine; 1 rifle 315 bore, with 1 live catridge 315 bore inside the magazine, two mobile phones of the ac-

cused and a Swift Car. The police recovered 4 bullet shells of .32 bore and 4 bullet shells of .315 bore from the

spot which were fired by the accused. The FIR further states that the police were able to recover only 2 out of

the 6 bullets fired by the police, due to bushes around the area where the firing had taken place.


FIR No. 861 and 862 was filed against Sumit Gujjar and three other unkonown accused persons u/s 307 IPC

and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act 1959 in PS. Kasna Distt Gautam Budh Nagar, on 4.10.2017 at 12.10am on

the statement of SHO Jitendra Kumar, PS. Kasna. Post Mortem was conducted by a panel of two doctors on

4.10.2017. Videography was also done. A Magisterial Inquiry was initiated by SDM, Gautambudh Nagar and

the family had given their written submissions to the SDM.



Sumit’s family was not informed by the police about the killing of Sumit in a police encounter, as is

mandated by the above mentioned guideline. Infact as stated by the family, from 30.9.2017, the police

officials have deliberately given false information to the family.

FIR was registered against the victim which is alleged to be false and fabricated as per Sumit’s family.

No FIR/inquiry has been initiated against the policemen involved, inspite of the letters/representations

sent by Karam Chand to various police, state and national authorities.



The Post Mortem Report has not been made available to his family as yet, inspite of multiple attempts

made by them.


risdiction for inquiry, in all cases of death which occur in the course of police firing. The same has not

been done even 6 months after the killing of Sumit.

Even though Karam Chand had sent multiple letters to NHRC apprising them about the partial and

malafide role of the police in investigating the case, there has been no response from NHRC, which is

mandated in cases raising serious doubt about independant and impartial investigation. NHRC initiat-

57


ed a complaint suo moto based on newspaper reports, however no inquiry has been ordered as yet.

Chargesheet under Section 173 CrPC has not yet been filed by the police, 6 months after the incident.

Guidlines state that no out-of-turn promotion or instant gallantry rewards shall be bestowed on the

concerned officers soon after the occurrence. It must be ensured at all costs that such rewards are giv-

en/recommended only when the gallantry of the concerned officers is established beyond doubt. It is

pertinent to note SHO PS Kasna - Jitender Kumar was promoted on 1.1.2018 to DSP Meerut in clear vio-

lation of the guidelines.

The Guidelines state that if family members of the victim find that the procedure laid down by the

Court has not been followed or there exists a pattern of abuse or lack of independent investigation or

impartiality by any of the functionaries of the State, then it may make a complaint to the Sessions

Judge having territorial jurisdiction over the place of incident. Upon such complaint being made, the

concerned Sessions Judge shall look into the merits of the complaint and address the grievances raised

therein. When the Chief Judicial Magistrate Baghpat or Gautambudh Nagar were not competent to

decide the 156(3) application filed by Karam Chand in light of the above guidelines, they should have

referred the matter to the Sessions Judge for proper enquiry and redressal of the grievances. Instead

the CJM dismissed the application of Kamal Chand taking a shallow view of the matter and in violation

of the SC guidelines.

Points raising doubts on police version:

The following points raise serious doubts about the police version of the encounter:

The family’s testimony falsifies the police version of the story. While the family tried its best to get in-

formation about their son, by writing multiple complaints letters to police authorities, NHRC, state

and district administration, no action has yet been taken.

As per the family’s testimony, the police deliberately gave false information to the family about the

whereabouts of Sumit.

Further, the torture marks seen on Sumit’s body by his family members also raises doubts on the se-

quence of events mentioned by the police.

The events which are mentioned in the FIR seem to be unbelievable. 16 armed police personnels with 3

cars at their disposal, could not arrest 3 criminals who are alleged to have escaped on foot.

It is also unbelievable that 16 armed police personnels who were engaged in a armed confrontation

with 4 armed criminals fired only 6 bullets in their defence, out of which 2 bullets hit one criminal

while the others managed to escape. In contrast, the criminals have been alleged to fire 8 or more bul-

lets.

It is also interesting to note that while the police officials were able to recover 8 bullets fired by the

accused, they managed to recover only 2 of the bullets fired by the police.

The process of identification of Sumit as mentioned in the FIR also raises doubts when seen in light of

the testimony given by Sumit’s father.

The bullet proof jackets which received bullets from the criminals were not seized by the police for

investigation.

A cursory look at the points mentioned by the family contradict the police version of the alleged encounter

and raise a prima facie doubt about the veracity of the claims made by the police. A detailed, fair and impar-

tial investigation is therefore required in the present case to bring out the true and correct facts of the alleged

encounter.


58

CASE MEMORANDUM – MANSOOR S/O AKBAR, VILLAGE PATHANPURA, JASMOUR NO. 3, PS BEHAT, DISTRICT SAHARANPUR, UP.

Context:

On 27.09.2017, it was reported in media that Mansoor, was killed in a police encounter, while his accomplice was successful in escaping from the police. It was stated that the criminals fired at the police and the police had to open fire in self defence. An FIR was registered against unknown accused persons mentioning a similar sequence of events. The police later identified the arrested accused as Mansoor S/O Akbar. However, family’s narration of the sequence of events before and after the alleged encounter raises serious doubt about the po-lice story.

Following are the major points which calls for an urgent intervention and an independent investigation into this case:


Mansoor belonged to a destitute family of Pathanpura Jasmor PS Behet, Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh. In his youth he would undertake odd jobs such as daily agricultural labour, electric appliances repair, etc. Poor, un-educated, without regular employment, yet a man of health and strong temperament, Mansoor was a perfect proxy (informer) for the state police to put to various uses such as intelligence gathering, extortion, extra ju-dicial violence, robbery, dacoity, murders. In 2006-2007 Mansoor was forced by the local police men namely Prashant Kapil (SHO PS Sadar Bazar) and Rashid Ali (SHO PS Lisadigate) among others to act as their proxy in their area. He was granted impunity for waylaying, robbery , dacoity, etc and was provided the proceeds of the crime which was shared between these policemen and Mansoor on an 80:20 ratio. This was not an agree-ment Mansoor could have simply refused to enter as refusal would have lead to threats, violence, custody without charge, torture, framing of false charges, even murder by way of false encounter of Mansoor by the police. Such extreme police coercion and perhaps the abject poverty made Mansoor a petty criminal generat-ing money for the police. Mansoor was arrested for a crime in 2013 and he spent 3 years in Saharanpur Jail. Mansoor’s family alleges that his mental health condition deteriorated during his time in jail as he was elec-trocuted and tortured in prison. After his release in 2015, he became totally dependent on his family. He was undergoing treatment by local physicians and was not able to eat, drink, take bath or be aware of his wherea-bouts. Villagers would often bring him home in the evening, from the village area where he would roam una-ware. Unfolding of the incident as per family narrative:

Mansoor’s mother, Javeda states that on 26th September 2017, around 12 noon, Prashant Kapil (SHO, PS Sadar Bazar, Meerut) and Rashid Ali (SHO, PS Lisargate) visited Mansoor’s house. Javeda, who knew them for past 10-12 years since they were posted in Saharanpur previously, called Mansoor from the village forest on their insistence. After spending some time with Mansoor, they declared they wanted to take Mansoor with them for a while and would return by evening. Being old acquaintances of Mansoor, family expected no foul play. However it was evident that Mansoor did not want to go with them and the two policemen forced him inside their vehicle, in which two other policemen were already sitting.


Next day, 27th September 2017, at around 3.00 am, local police official from PS Behat visited their house and asked Mansoor’s father to sign on some papers. They did not inform them about Mansoor’s killing and just stated that those were warrant papers on Mansoor’s name. Few hours later, early morning, villagers informed the family that the media is reporting about Mansoor’s killing in an encounter. The family went to Meerut Medical College in the afternoon, where Mansoor’s post mortem was conducted. It is interesting to note that the General Diary No. 5 recorded at 2.30 am on 27/9/2017 at PS Medical, Meerut states that at 2.30 am SHO Prashant Kapil. PS. Sadar Bazaar, Meerut informed the P.S. Medical Meerut that the accused killed in the police encounter has been identified as Mansoor s/o Akbar R/o village Pathanpura, PS Behat, Dist Saharanpur, by Co. Jayvardhan, Crime Branch Meerut. The GD further states that at 2.30 am SHO Prashant Kapil informed the SHO of PS Behat Dist. Saharanpur, in a telephonic conversation, about the details of the encounter and the identity of the deceased accused and Co. 1049 Vinod Kumar was sent to give


information about the incident and for necessary investigation. Thus, at 2.30 am the police officials of PS Behat were aware about the details of the encounter, and the identity of the deceased accused. Thus, the po-lice officials of PS Behat deliberately hid the fact that Mansoor was killed in an encounter and intentionally did not provide complete details about the encounter to the family which is not only violative of the guide-lines laid down by the Apex Court but also points towards police complicity. Bullet wounds on the body: Javeda, Mansoor’s mother further states that when Mansoor’s body was brought home, they noticed that his body had one bullet wound on the left side of his chest, with marks of tatooing around it. The Post Mortem Report also states the same. This indicates that Mansoor was shot from a close range straight on his chest which led to his immediate death. Legal Recourse taken by the family:

On 26th April, 2018 Mansoor’s mother, Javeda has sent a representation to the National Commission on Mi-norities, New Delhi narrating the facts leading upto Mansoor’s alleged killing in police action. The letter fur-ther states that the family has got to know that a closure report has been filed by the police in the case. It also states that no statements have been recorded of Mansoor’s family either by the police or by any Magistrate. Due to fear of possible police backlash, and the struggle of survival that the family is undergoing, the family has not pursued any legal action against the police officials so far.

Investigation by State authorities: The SHO of PS Sadar Bazaar, Prashant Kapil filed FIR No. 489/17 dated 27/9/17 in PS Sadar Bazar, District Meerut under section 307 (attempt to murder) of the Indian Penal Code 1860, against unknown accused per-sons. Another FIR No. 490/17 dated 27/9/17 was filed by PS Sadar Bazar, District Meerut under Section 25 and 27 (use and possession of arms or ammunition) of Arms Act 1959, against unknown accused person. The ac-cused killed in the police encounter was later identified as Mansoor s/o Akbar R/o village Pathanpura, PS Behat, Dist Saharanpur, by Co. Jayvardhan, Crime Branch Meerut. Inquest Report was prepared by Santosh Kumar, Tehsildar, Sadar, Dist Meerut. Post Mortem was conducted at Meerut Medical College and the same was videographed. On 10th October 2017, the investigation of the case was transferred to Crime Branch, Mee-rut by SSP Meerut. On 3.12.2017 a final report was submitted u/s 173 CrPC to CJM, Meerut for FIR Nos. 489/2017 and 490/2017 on the ground that the accused in the FIRs died on his way to the hospital. The GD enteries attached with the Final Report state that the identity of the accused who escaped the encounger could not be ascertained by the informers relied upon by the police. A Letter dated 9.12.2017 from the com-plainant Prashant Kapil, SHO, P.S. Sada Bazaar to the CJM, Meerut states that he has no objection to the Fi-nal Report submitted by the police in the abovementioned cases.

Violation of Guidelines laid down by Supreme Court in People’s Union of Civil Liberties vs. State of Maharashtra, (2014)10SCC635 :

Mansoor’s family was not informed by the police about the killing of Mansoor in a police encounter, as is mandated by the above mentioned guideline. Infact as stated above, the police deliberately gave false infor-mation to the family.

FIR was registered against the victim which is alleged to be false and fabricated as per Mansoor’s family. No FIR/inquiry has been initiated against the policemen involved in the alleged encounter.

The investigation of the case has not been transferred to the CBCID or any other independent investiga-tion agency, as mandated by the Supreme Court guideline.

A report of the Magisterial inquiry must mandatorily be sent to a Judicial Magistrate of competent jurisdic-tion for inquiry, in all cases of death which occur in the course of police firing. The family has not received any summons from the Court and is thus, not aware if an inquiry by a Judicial Magistrate has been held, as is mandated by the Supreme Court.

Instead a Final Closure Report u/s 173 CrPC was submitted by the police which was accepted by the CJM, Meerut. The CJM instead of accepting the final report submitted by the police, should have instituted an inquiry into the manner and cause of death as is mandated in the abovestated guidelines.

Forensic examination of the weapons seized, bullet shells recovered, blood stained earth etc have not been conducted.


As per the police story, Mansoor was killed during an ‘encounter’ on 27th September, 2017, an hour after mid-

59


60

night, by the Meerut Police. PS Sadar Bazar, Meerut filed FIR 489/17 and 490/17 against unknown person, who was later identified as Mansoor. As per the police complaint, information was received by SHO Prashant Kapil, PS Sadar Bazar, that three criminals on a bike have looted a WagonR car. The Police states that they spotted the car and tried to stop the WagonR car, which was now being driven by the two criminals. On be-ing asked to stop, the criminals tried to speed away in the car, which was followed by SHO Prashant Kapil and his team of 4 constables. He also called for reinforcements and the SHO Rashid Ali of Lisadigate Police Station, also reached the spot with his team. Near Gandhi Bagh Gate No. 2, the car was surrounded by police from both sides. On finding themselves being trapped, the two criminals got out of the car and started firing at the police officials. The police officials also fired in self defence, due to which one of the criminals was in-jured and he fell near the car. The other criminal managed to escape by firing at the police officials and climb-ing over the wall of Gandhi Bagh. The injured criminal, was sent to the Medical College, Meerut for treat-ment.

Points raising doubts on police version: The following points raise serious doubts about the police version of the encounter:

The fact that four policemen forcibly took away Mansoor from his house a day before his killing in an encounter, falsifies the police narrative.

Javeda, Mansoor’s mother further states that both SHO Prashant Kapil and SHO Rashid Ali were aware about Mansoor’s ill health and thus he was a soft target for them.

On 27.9.2017, at 2.30 am, the police officials of PS Behat were aware about the details of the encounter, and the identity of the deceased accused. Even though they visited the family at 3.00 am, they didnot inform the family about the encounter, but also provided false information to them, thus raising doubts about the police trying to cover up the alleged incident.

The police managed to recover only 3 bullet shells fired by the accused in the incident and only one bullet shell fired by the police. The FIR offers no explanation as to why the other bullet shells could not be recovered. It is also interesting to note that in the entire incident of encounter, the police fired only 3 bullets, out of which 1 bullet hit the accused straight in his chest which led to his death.

The FIR also states that the second accused managed to escape by firing at the police and climbing the wall of the Gandhi Bagh where the encounter had taken place. It is interesting to note that 13 armed police personnels who had surrounded 2 accused, were not able to apprehend/injure the second ac-cused even though it is stated that he climbed over the wall to escape the police.

Further, it is stated in the FIR that one bullet fired by the criminals hit the bullet proof jacket of SHO Rashid Ali, P.S. Lasadigate. There is no mention of the bullet proof jacket being seized and parcelled for investigation.


61


CASE MEMORANDUM – SHAMSHAD S/O SHAHID R/O VILLAGE SHERPUR, KHANAJADPUR, DIST –

SAHARANPUR, UP.

Context:

On 11.09.2017, it was reported that the police officials of PS Sadar Bazaar had killed a criminal, later identified

as Shamshaad in a police encounter, while his accomplice was successful in escaping from the police. It was

stated that the criminals fired at the police and the police had to open fire in self defence. An FIR was regis-

tered against Shamshaad mentioning a similar sequence of events. However, family’s narration of the se-

quence of events before and after the alleged encounter raises serious doubt about the police story.


this case:


Saliha, Shamshaad’s wife states that Shamshad was imprisoned in Deoband jail for past year and a half. On 7th

September, 2017, Shaamshad’s wife came to know that the police are saying that Shadshaad had been brought

to Vikas Nagar from Deoband jail for a hearing, and on the way back to Deoband he escaped, along with an

accomplice. She states that on 11th September, 2017 she heard that Shamshaad was killed in an encounter by

officials of PS Sadar Bazaar. Saliha further alleges that the police officials had infact concocted the story of

Shamshaad running away from jail. The police officers had illegally kidnapped Shamshaad on his way back,

tortured and then killed him. Later on 11th September, 2017 the police showed that Shamshaad had been killed

in an encounter.


Saliha states that when they received the body after post mortem they noticed marks of beatings on his neck

and other body parts. She further states that it looked like the body was 2-3 days old since it was bloated. She

further states that the bullet wounds were surrounded by blackening of skin, indicating that he was shot at

from a close range.

It is important to note that in the FIR the time of occurrence of the event is stated as 11.09.2017 at 1.30 am. The

Post Mortem Report records the time of the post mortem as 4.55 PM on 11.9.2017. The Post Mortem Report

however, very clearly states that the body sent for post mortem looks 1-4 days old. This raises a question on

the sequence of events stated by the police and proves the allegations made by Saliha in her testimony. Fur-

ther, the post mortem also records that the 7Th, 8th and 9th rib on left side was fractured. The PMR states the

following bullet wounds – 3 bullets on the front left side of the chest, one bullet on right knee joint.


Saliha further states that the day Shamshaad was shown as being absconding, police officers came to their

house and took all Shamshaad’s three brothers with them. Saliha had sent written complaints to National

Human Rights Commission, State Human Rights Commission and the National Commission For Minorities,

but she did not receive any reply. Due to fear of possible police backlash, and the struggle of survival that the

family is undergoing, the family has not pursued any legal action against the police officials so far.


The FIR is filed on the statement of SO Yajdat Sharma, PS Sadar Bazaar, Dist – Saharanpur. The FIR states

that the SHO, Nanota had informed the control room that two criminals on a motorcycle, ran away firing at

the police at Deoband Phatak during police checking. The criminals were being chased by him alongwith 3

police officers armed with guns and AK-47 in a police car. While SO Yajdat Sharma alongwith 5 police offic-


62

ers, all armed with pistols, AK-47 and with 70 bullets, was stationed at a police check post near Hasanpur

Chungi. SHO Nanota also reached Hasanpur Chungi and informed SO Yajdat about his chase with the crimi-

nals. SHO Nanota had also informed the SWAT team regarding the same who reached Hasanpur Chungi

alongwith 8 police officers of the SWAT Team, all armed with pistols, AK-47 and 80 bullets. Another police

team of Intelligence Wing, comprising of 6 police officers armed with pistols and 40 bullets were sent to

Khalasi Line area to look for the criminals. While SO Jajdat Sharma and SHO Nanota alongwith 8 other offic-

ers were continuing their search at Hasanpur Chungi, they saw the two accused on the motorcycle approach

the police barricade. On seeing the police, the accused tried to run away and were followed by the police

officers. The accused fired bullet shots at the police team while trying to run away. The two other police

teams, (SWAT Team and Intelligence Wing) were already informed and were waiting in position to surround

the accused. Subsequently, the accused on seeing the other police teams turned their bike to escape, their

motorcycle slipped on the road and the criminals fell down. They started firing on the police parties. The po-

lice fired back in self defence. Thereafter one criminal got injured due to the bullets fired by the police, while

the other managed to escape. The police recovered one .32 bore pistol with 2 live catridges and one .9mm

pistol left behind by the criminal who managed to escape. A bike was also recovered by the police. It is stated

in the FIR that SI Arun Pawar and Co. Arun Rana were injured in the police firing in their hand, while 4 po-

lice officers received bullets on their bullet proof jackets. The injured accused was identified as Shamshaad by

two police officers who claimed to be present when he had managed to escape from police custody while be-

ing brought back from a court hearing. It is also stated in the FIR that the police officers fired 25 bullets at the

criminals. Shamshaad and the injured officers were sent to District Hospital, Saharanpur for treatment.


An FIR bearing No. 433 dated 11.9.2017 was filed in PS Sadar Bazaar against Shamshad and another unknown

accused person, u/s 307 IPC and Section 41, 102 CrPC. An Inspector level officer from PS Janakpuri was made

the Investigating Officer in the case. Post Mortem was conducted and the same was videographed. The family

is not aware of any further investigation carried out by the police.



Shamshaad’s family was not informed by the police about the killing of Shamshaad in a police encoun-

ter, as is mandated by the above mentioned guideline.

FIR was registered against the victim which is alleged to be false and fabricated as per the testimony of

Shamshaad’s wife. No FIR/inquiry has been initiated against the policemen involved in the alleged en-

counter.




risdiction for inquiry, in all cases of death which occur in the course of police firing. The family has not

received any summons from the Court and is thus, not aware if an inquiry by a Judicial Magistrate has

been held, as is mandated by the Supreme Court.



As per the FIR, the Post Mortem was conducted Even though the FIR and the Post Mortem was con-

ducted on the same day, within a span of 15 hours, the Post Mortem Report however, very clearly states

that the body sent for post mortem looks 1-4 days old. This raises a question on the sequence of events

stated by the police and proves the allegations made by Saliha in her testimony that her husband

Shamshaad was actually illegally kidnapped by the police on 7th September and on 11th September, the

police made up the alleged story of an encounter.

Even though the FIR records the presence of 24 police officials from 3 departments, armed with pistols,

AK-47s and 190 bullets, they were not able to arrest the second accused who allegedly ran away on foot,

leaving their bike and his gun after an incident.


Further, the FIR states that the police recovered 18 bullet shells from the spot. The FIR doesnot men-

tion the details about the bullets recovered and is also silent about who these bullets belong to, the

accused or the police parties. The FIR also states that the police party alone had fired 25 rounds.

The FIR is also silent about the injuries received by Shamshaad or the number of bullets that wounded

him.

Further, the PM Report indicates that Shamshaad was hit by 4 bullets fired by the police, out of the 25

rounds of firing done by the police as stated in the FIR.




encounter.

63


64

CASE MEMORANDUM – NADEEM (S/O LATE IRSHAD), R/O VILLAGE BAGHOWALI, NAI MANDI, MUZAFFARNAGAR, UP.

Context:

On 09.09.2017, it was reported in media that Nadeem, who had fled from police custody and as a result of which an award of Rs.15000 was announced on him, was encountered by the police near Jatwada Gangnahar flyover on 8th Septemeber. Within three days of fleeing custody, the police was reported of his activities near Jatwada Gangnahar flyover. Upon reaching the spot, police and the victim both started firing and the victim fell on the ground. He was declared dead upon reaching the hospital. However, family’s narration of the se-quence of events before and after the alleged encounter raises serious doubt about the police story.


this case:


Family testimony of Nadeem’s uncle, Mohd. Isha Ali, attests to an altercation between Nadeem and a local jewellery shop owner. He states that Nadeem was unhappy with a ring purchased from the jewellery shop and demanded a refund or exchange. The shop owner was intimidated by Nadeem’s aggressive overtures follow-ing which he approached the police and filed a case of theft against Nadeem. The family states that the police, saw this as an opportunity to extort a huge sum from Nadeem, demanding a sum of Rs. 6 Lakhs to suppress the FIR. Nadeem a man of meagre earnings refused to pay the bribe to the police officials. The police was fur-ther emboldened when it found that the complainant was unwilling to pursue the FIR and had instead agreed to settle the matter with Nadeem as the case involved a minor issue of a ring.


Mohd. Esha Ali, Nadeem’s uncle further claims that Nadeem was picked up by the police officials of PS Nai Mandi on 5th September 2017, from their village, in a false case of theft and was kept in police custody and tortured. On 6.9.2017, Mohd. Isha Ali, Mujmil, Village Pradhan along with other members of the family went to PS. Nai Mandi. In the police station, the officials showed the family that Nadeem was detained in the police station but refused to give them any documents pertaining to his detention or arrest. The family members waited outside the police station till evening and then returned back home. Thereafter, the family members got to know that the police is saying that Nadeem escaped from police custody on 06.09.2017 by throwing chillies at the police officers. When the family members got to know about this, they feared that Nadeem will be made a victim of police encounters. They immediately sent a letter through fax addressed to the National Human Rights Commission, district police officials and other authorities mentioning the illegal detention of Nadeem and that they now fear for his life.


The family members got to know on 8th September, 2017 that Nadeem has been killed in a police encounter.

Mohd. Isha Ali states that their worst fears came alive, and that police officials of PS Nai Mandi had handed

over Nadeem to officials of PS Kakroli to murder him.


When Nadeem’s body was handed over to his family after the post mortem, they saw that his body was cov-

ered with marks of beating and torture. The bones of his arms, legs, spinal cord and neck had all been broken

due to brutal beatings. The only visible bullet wound was a clean shot in the forehead. The family however,

have not been given a copy of the Post Mortem Report of Nadeem.


Nadeem’s uncle further states that after the alleged encounter, the police officials regularly come to their

house and threaten Nadeem’s mother, Samar Jahan, that she will be killed and murdered in a similar manner


if they take any action. Due to fear of possible police backlash, and the struggle of survival that the family is

undergoing, the family has not pursued any legal action against the police officials so far.


The First Information Report (FIR) filed by the police states that Nadeem was injured in police firing on 8th

September, 2017 and he later succumbed to his injuries. The FIR states that Station Officer (SO), P.S. Kakroli

Anil Kumar Singh got the information around 8:30 pm that on Sambhalheda – Jatwada road a motorcyclist,

who have tried to loot other motorcyclists, are on a pulsar bike and are coming towards Jatwada. The SO with

other officials were standing near a chowk heading towards sambhalheda, when a motorcycle was seen com-

ing from Sambhalheda. The Police officials gesticulated them to stop with the torch light, after which motor-

cyclist turned the bike toward north and the motorcycle slipped. When the police officials tried to go towards

them both the persons on the motorcycle stood up and started firing on the police officials in which Sub In-

spector (SI) Vijay Kr Tyagi got hit by a bullet in his arm. Seeing the situation the SO gave orders for firing.

One of the two assailants got injured and the other managed to escape. Both, injured person and injured SI

were sent to govt. hospital janseth for treatment, where the assailant succumbed to his injuries. Later through

whatsapp and newspaper the accused was identified as Nadim s/o Irshad r/o Bagowali, Nai Mandi , Muz-

zafarnagar Uttar Pradesh.


Three FIRs (FIR No. 0396/17, FIR No. 0397/17, FIR No. 0398/17) related to the incident have been filed against

Nadeem and an unknown accused dated 8/09/2017 filed in Kakroli Police Station, District Muzaffarnagar for

attempt to murder (Section 307, Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 ), possession of arms and ammunition

(Section 25(3) of Arms Act 1959), assisting in concealment of stolen property (Section 414 of IPC, 1860) stating

that Nadeem was injured due to police firing and captured, while the other accomplice escaped. A post mor-

tem was conducted by the police officials. Nadeem’s family is not aware of any further investigation being

carried out by the police. Further, the family has not been given the Post Mortem Report by the police offi-

cials as yet.



FIR was registered against the victim which is alleged to be false and fabricated as per Mansoor’s fami-

ly. No FIR/inquiry has been initiated against the policemen involved in the alleged encounter.






The entire sequence of events stated by the police is falsified on the basis of testimony of Nadeem’s

family. It is pertinent to note that Nadeem was illegally detained in PS Nai Mandi, and was thereafter

shown to have fled police custody, on the same day on which Nadeem’s family visited PS Nai Mandi

and saw Nadeem in police custody. Further, Nadeem’s uncle also states that he alongwith other people

were standing outside the police station till evening, waiting for the police officers to release Nadeem.

The marks of beatings on Nadeem’s body and fractured limbs and spinal cord, as noticed by his family,

are a testimony of torture before Nadeem was killed. This further raises questions on the the sequence

of events mentioned in the FIR.

The FIR is vague. It does not mention important aspects such as the injuries sustained by the accused,

the number of shots fired by the police officials alongwith the type of weapon used .




encounter. 65


66

CASE MEMORANDUM – IKRAM S/O MUNSHI, R/O 13/279 NEAR GURUDWARA PATTI ME-HAR, BADOT, BAGHPAT, UP.

Context:

It was reported in the media, that on 12th August 2017, two people were trying to abscond after looting a bike. The police chased the criminals, who opened fire on the police. Police fired in self defence Ikram was injured and was taken to Meerut Medical College where he was declared dead. Police retrieved looted bike, 8700 ru-pees, gold ring and watch pistols and catridges from the place where the incident took place and also in-formed that 13 cases were registered against the deadred criminal. An FIR was registed on the same sequence of events. However, the family’s narration of the sequence of events before and after the alleged encounter raises serious doubt about the police story. Following are the major points which calls for an urgent intervention and an independent investigation into this case:

Family Narrative - Unfolding of the incident:

Hanifa, Ikram’s wife states that on 10th August, 2017, at around 12.30 pm, Shakeel s/o Munsab and Sunil along with 5-6 other men came to her house and inquired about Ikram’s whereabouts. They were informed by Hani-fa that Ikram had gone to Aastha Hospital, Badot. Hanifa further states that the men left her house and went to Aastha Hospital, Badot and called Ikram out of the hospital. Ikram was accompanied by his younger son Sajid who was sent back inside the hospital and thereafter Ikram was assaulted and taken away in a car.


Ikram’s family looked for him the entire night, but he could not be found. On the morning of 11th August 2017, Hanifa was informed by her relatives that Ikram was killed in a police encounter by officials of PS Kairana. She further states that the police officials did not inform her family about Ikram’s death. Infact they were told about the encounter only when Ikram’s minor sons went to PS Kairana to inquire about their father. When Ikram’s body was returned to the family, the police officials threatened them saying that if the family takes any legal action, Ikram’s wife will also be killed in a similar manner and false cases will be registered against her minor sons.

Torture marks on the body: When the family looked at Ikram’s body they noticed severe marks of torture. There was a huge injury wound on the back of the head and other marks of assault on his waist, neck and other parts of the body. Further his arms and ribs were fractured. The post mortem report also corroborates the statement given by Hanifa. As per the PM Report, Ikram had 5 bullet wounds on his right knee, right thigh, right foot, left knee, left foot and 3 fractures on his right leg. Fur-ther, blackening marks found around the gunshot wounds indicate close range fire.


On 24th April, 2018 Ikram’s wife Hanifa has sent a representation to the National Commission on Minorities, New Delhi narrating the facts leading upto Ikram’s alleged killing in police action. Due to fear of possible po-lice backlash, and the struggle of survival that the family is undergoing, the family has not pursued any legal action against the police officials so far.


The complaint describes how an information was received by police that two criminals have looted a bike, Rs 8,700, a gold chain and a gold ring. When they were apprehended by police on the way, their bike slipped, they fired upon the police and police also fired back. According to the FIR report the police had Ikram sur-rounded from all sides between 11:30 and 12:00 a.m during which Ikram kept firing indiscriminately at the po-lice team. Ikram was hit by the police firing, and thereafter captured by police while his accomplice escaped. The injured criminal identified himself as Ikram, and was taken to CHC, Kairana where he succumbed to inju-ries. Ikram also stated that the name of his accomplice was Shakil s/o Munsab. Weapon, money and jewellery shown as recovery from the accused. Co. Ankush Godara & Co. Raghu Raj Singh were injured by the bullets fired by the accused. Both the police officers were also sent to CHC, Kairana for treatment. As per the FIR, 15 police officials of PS Kairana, PS Kotwali and officials of SWAT Team involved in the police action.



3 FIRs bearing No. 785/2017, 786/2017, 787/2017 were filed in PS Kairana, Shamli District dated 11.8.2017 u/s 307 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act against Ikram & Shakeel s/o Munsab. Investigation of the 3 FIRs was trans-ferred to SHO Umesh Roriya, PS Kandhla by SP, Shamli. Inquest proceedings u/s 174 Crpc were undertaken and a post mortem was conducted and the process was videographed. Final report has been filed on the FIR No. 785/17, 786/17 and 787/17 on the ground that Ikram succumbed to his injuries and the accomplice called Shakeel could not be identified. The IO has taken statements of residents of Hajipur Mohalla saying that no-body called shakeel lives in that area. Violation of Guidelines laid down by Supreme Court in People’s Union of Civil Liberties vs. State of Maharashtra, (2014)10SCC635 :

Ikram’s family was not informed by the police about the killing of Ikram in a police encounter, as is mandated by the above mentioned guideline. Infact they were told about the encounter only when Ikram’s minor sons went to PS Kairana to inquire about their father. When Ikram’s body was returned to the family, the police officials threatened them saying that if the family takes any legal action, Ikram’s wife will also be killed in a similar manner and false cases will be registered against her minor sons.

FIR was registered against the victim which is alleged to be false and fabricated as per Ikram’s family. No FIR/inquiry has been initiated against the policemen involved in the alleged encounter.

The investigation of the case has not been transferred to the CBCID or any other independent investi-gation agency, as mandated by the Supreme Court guideline.


Instead a Final Closure Report u/s 173 CrPC was submitted by the police which was accepted by the CJM, Shamli. The CJM instead of accepting the final report submitted by the police, should have insti-tuted an inquiry into the manner and cause of death as is mandated in the abovestated guidelines.

Forensic examination of the weapons seized, bullet shells recovered, blood stained earth etc have not been conducted.


The fact that Ikram’s wife states that a day before his encounter, Shakeel s/o Munsab (named as Ikram’s accomplice who escaped) and Sunil along with 5-6 other men came to her house and inquired about Ikram’s whereabouts and his minor son Sajid being a witness to Shakeel meeting Ikram minutes before he was kidnapped, falsifies the police narrative.

The role of police in the entire incident as stated by Ikram’s wife raises questions on their implicity. The police officials did not inform Ikram’s family about his death and infact they were told about the encounter only when Ikram’s minor sons went to PS Kairana to inquire about their father. When Ikram’s body was returned to the family, the police officials threatened them saying that if the family takes any legal action, Ikram’s wife will also be killed in a similar manner and false cases will be regis-tered against her minor sons.

It is interesting to note that 16 armed police personnels were not able to apprehend the second accused who managed to escape on foot.

The details of injuries received by the police officers is not mentioned in the FIR.


67


68

ANNEXE-III

Ex

tra

jud

icia

l E

xe

cuti

on

ca

ses

in U

P

Lis

t II

– w

ith

ou

t a

ffid

av

its

(arr

an

ge

d c

hro

no

log

ica

lly

)

V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

to t

he

bo

dy

F

am

ily

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

ing

s

10

Eh

saa

n s

/o

Me

hm

oo

d

25.0

3.20

18

Pla

ce:

Sah

aran

pu

r,

UP

As

per

new

spap

er r

epo

rts

po

-li

ce w

as i

nfo

rmed

on

24

th

Mar

ch n

igh

t, t

hat

tw

o c

rim

i-n

als

had

sh

ot

a fa

rmer

an

d

had

lo

ote

d m

on

ey f

rom

him

. T

hey

wer

e in

th

e lo

ok

ou

t fo

r th

e cr

imin

als.

Th

e p

oli

ce o

ffi-

cial

s o

f th

e C

rim

e B

ran

ch s

aw

the

crim

inal

s n

ear

Gan

na

Man

di

un

der

PS

Man

di,

ear

ly

in t

he

mo

rnin

g. T

he

accu

sed

fi

red

at

the

po

lice

, an

d t

he

po

lice

fire

d b

ack

in

sel

f d

e-fe

nce

. E

hsa

an w

as i

nju

red

w

hil

e h

is a

cco

mp

lice

man

-ag

ed t

o e

scap

e. C

o.

Sac

hin

S

har

ma

was

als

o i

nju

red

in

th

e cr

oss

firi

ng

wh

o w

as s

ent

to D

istr

ict

Ho

spit

al f

or

trea

t-m

ent.

As

per

UP

po

lice

, E

hsa

an h

ad 4

0 c

ases

of

da-

coit

y, m

urd

er a

nd

rap

e re

gis

-te

red

ag

ain

st h

im a

nd

had

an

aw

ard

of

Rs.

25,

00

0 o

n h

is

hea

d.

Po

lice

rec

ove

red

a b

ike,

R

s. o

ne

lak

h i

n c

ash

(w

hic

h

was

lo

ot

mo

ney

) an

d a

9m

m

pis

tol

fro

m E

hsa

an.

No

det

ails

ava

ilab

le

Eh

saan

’s w

ife,

Sh

amim

a st

ates

th

at

thre

e an

d a

hal

f y

ears

ag

o,

Eh

saan

h

ad

bee

n a

rres

ted

an

d p

ick

ed u

p f

rom

Jh

in-

jhan

a, a

nd

co

nvi

cted

fo

r 5

year

s at

Deh

-ra

du

n.

Sh

amim

a h

ad g

ot

him

ou

t o

n

bai

l o

n 9

th M

arch

, 20

18.

Sin

ce h

e w

as v

ery

un

wel

l, h

e h

ad g

on

e to

liv

e at

a r

elat

ive’

s p

lace

. T

he

day

he

was

kil

led

, h

e sp

ok

e to

his

sis

ter

(Sh

ama)

an

d S

ham

ima

sayi

ng

th

at h

e w

as w

ith

his

Un

cle’

s d

aug

hte

r (R

uk

san

a, w

/o U

sman

, N

awab

gan

j,

Sar

ai C

ho

wk

) an

d t

hat

he

wo

uld

ret

urn

th

e n

ext

day

as

he

was

no

t w

ell.

Th

is

con

vers

atio

n w

as a

t 2

-2.3

0 p

m.

At

5.30

p

m h

is f

amil

y w

as i

nfo

rmed

of

his

de-

mis

e.

No

det

ails

ava

ilab

le.


V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

to t

he

bo

dy

F

am

ily

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

ing

s

11.

Ak

ba

r s/

o

Ma

hm

oo

d

3rd

Feb

ruar

y, 2

018

at

7.10

PM

Pla

ce:

Nea

r K

ali

Man

dir

, Jh

injh

ana

- U

n R

oad

, D

istr

ict

Sh

amli

As

per

po

lice

rec

ord

s, A

kb

ar

had

esc

aped

in

an

en

cou

nte

r o

n 1

.1.2

018

in

wh

ich

Sab

ir w

as

kil

led

, an

d t

her

eaft

er p

oli

ce

had

dec

lare

d a

rew

ard

of

Rs.

50

,00

0 o

n A

kb

ar.

03.

2.20

18 F

IR fi

led

ag

ain

st

Ak

bar

fo

r ex

tort

ion

& a

ttem

pt

to m

urd

er.

SW

AT

tea

m i

n-

form

ed,

pla

n m

ade

to c

aptu

re

the

accu

sed

.

Tw

o p

eop

le c

ame

on

a m

oto

r-cy

cle

to p

ick

up

th

e ra

nso

m

mo

ney

, as

ked

to

su

rren

der

by

the

po

lice

, as

sail

ants

fire

d

up

on

th

e p

oli

ce,

po

lice

fire

d

in s

elf

def

ence

.

On

e cr

imin

al i

nju

red

, ta

ken

to

ho

spit

al,

succ

um

bed

to

in

juri

es,

the

oth

er a

ccu

sed

es

cap

ed,

cou

ld n

ot

be

iden

ti-

fied

. T

wo

po

lice

men

als

o r

e-ce

ived

bu

llet

in

juri

es,

wer

e se

nt

to t

he

ho

spit

al f

or

trea

t-m

ent.

5 b

ull

et w

ou

nd

s in

clu

din

g

on

fac

e, s

tom

ach

an

d c

hes

t,

On

e ar

m f

ract

ure

d,

lig

atu

re

mar

ks

pre

sen

t o

n r

igh

t le

g,

ind

icat

ing

th

at h

e w

as t

ied

u

p.

Ak

bar

was

res

idin

g i

n B

ang

alo

re w

ith

h

is f

amil

y. H

is w

ife

& c

hil

dre

n h

ad

com

e to

th

eir

vill

age

in U

P,

8 d

ays

be-

fore

Ak

bar

’s e

nco

un

ter.

His

wif

e is

no

t aw

are

ho

w a

nd

wh

en A

kb

ar c

ame

to

Dis

tric

t S

ham

li.

Ak

bar

was

in

Ban

gal

ore

th

rou

gh

ou

t Ja

nu

ary,

co

ntr

adic

ts p

oli

ce c

laim

of

Ak

-b

ar e

scap

ing

, w

her

e S

abir

was

kil

led

.

No

in

qu

irie

s w

ere

mad

e b

y th

e p

oli

ce a

t th

eir

ho

use

in

Dis

tric

t S

ham

li.

3 F

IRs

(76

/20

18,

77/2

018

an

d

78/2

018

) fi

led

on

th

e st

atem

ent

of

San

dee

p B

aliy

an,

SH

O,

PS

Jh

injh

ana,

D

istr

ict

Sh

amli

, ag

ain

st A

kb

ar a

nd

an

oth

er u

n-

kn

ow

n a

ccu

sed

u/s

30

7, 4

14,

IPC

& S

ec 2

5 o

f A

rms

Act

, 19

59.

A P

ost

Mo

rtem

was

co

nd

uct

ed

by

the

Po

lice

, th

e re

po

rt o

f w

hic

h h

as n

ot

bee

n m

ade

avai

l-ab

le t

o A

kb

ar’s

fam

ily.

Fam

ily

is

no

t aw

are

of

any

furt

her

in

ves-

tig

atio

n b

ein

g c

arri

ed o

ut

by

the

po

lice

.

FIR

men

tio

ns

15 b

ull

ets

fire

d b

y p

oli

ce a

nd

rec

ove

ry o

f 13

bu

llet

sh

ells

. F

IR f

urt

her

sta

tes

that

11

bu

llet

sh

ells

fire

d b

y th

e p

oli

ce

wer

e p

arce

led

an

d s

eale

d f

rom

th

e sc

ene

of

crim

e. N

o e

xpla

na-

tio

n g

iven

as

to t

he

dis

crep

an-

cy.

FIR

sta

tes

a b

ull

et fi

red

by

the

accu

sed

go

t st

uck

in

th

e b

ull

et

pro

of

jack

et o

f S

I S

un

il S

ing

h.

FIR

mak

es n

o m

enti

on

of

the

bu

llet

pro

of

jack

et a

nd

th

e b

ul-

let

bei

ng

par

cele

d a

nd

sea

led

fo

r in

vest

igat

ion

.

69


70

V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

to t

he

bo

dy

F

am

ily

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

ing

s

12

No

or

Mo

ha

mm

ad

@

Ha

sse

n M

ota

30th

Dec

emb

er,

2017

at

10

:00

PM

Pla

ce:

Nea

r S

hat

abd

i N

agar

, M

eeru

t

Po

lice

go

t in

form

atio

n a

bo

ut

2 cr

imin

als

abo

ut

to c

om

mit

a

crim

e.

Po

lice

set

up

bar

rica

des

to

ap

pre

hen

d t

he

crim

inal

s.

Tw

o p

eop

le o

n a

mo

torc

ycle

, tr

ied

to

flee

aft

er s

eein

g t

he

po

lice

, ch

ased

by

the

po

lice

, m

oto

rcyc

le l

ost

bal

ance

an

d

fell

, cr

imin

als

fire

d g

un

sh

ots

at

po

lice

, p

oli

ce fi

red

in

sel

f d

efen

ce.

On

e cr

imin

al i

nju

red

, ta

ken

to

ho

spit

al,

succ

um

bed

to

in

juri

es,

the

oth

er a

ccu

sed

es

cap

ed,

cou

ld n

ot

be

iden

ti-

fied

.

4 b

ull

et w

ou

nd

s in

tem

ple

an

d a

bd

om

en a

rea.

Fam

ily

no

tice

d s

ever

e m

ark

s o

f b

eati

ng

on

th

e b

od

y, f

ract

ure

d a

rm a

nd

leg

Str

on

g s

mel

l o

f b

urn

ing

fl

esh

, an

d b

lack

enin

g

aro

un

d t

he

gu

nsh

ot

wo

un

ds

ind

icat

ing

bu

llet

s fi

red

fro

m a

clo

se r

ang

e.

Fam

ily

alle

ges

, h

e w

as o

n h

is w

ay h

om

e w

hen

he

was

way

laid

by

the

po

lice

, il

le-

gal

ly d

etai

ned

, to

rtu

red

, an

d s

ub

se-

qu

entl

y sh

ot

rep

eate

dly

.

Th

e x-

ray

rep

ort

tak

en o

n 2

9th

Oct

ob

er

2017

cle

arly

su

gg

ests

an

iss

ue

wit

h h

is

bo

ne

stru

ctu

re i

nd

icat

ing

th

at N

oo

r M

oh

amed

was

in

gre

at p

ain

an

d i

n n

o

con

dit

ion

to

tak

e o

n t

he

po

lice

in

an

al

leg

ed g

un

fig

ht.

Ap

art

fro

m a

few

pet

ty c

ases

No

or

Mo

-h

amm

ed w

as n

ever

in

volv

ed i

n a

ny

or-

gan

ised

cri

me

in t

he

reg

ion

, co

ntr

adic

ts

po

lice

ver

sio

n o

f N

oo

r M

oh

amm

ed b

e-in

g a

dre

aded

gan

gst

er w

ith

lin

ks

to t

he

Mu

kim

Kal

a g

ang

.

FIR

No

. 8

71/2

017

file

d a

t P

S

Par

tap

ur

on

th

e st

atem

ent

of

SI,

Jay

vir

Sin

gh

, C

rim

e B

ran

ch,

Mee

rut

agai

nst

No

or

Mo

ham

-m

ad a

nd

an

oth

er u

nk

no

wn

ac-

cuse

d,

u/s

30

7 IP

C.

Em

pty

car

trid

ges

fire

d b

y ac

-cu

sed

co

llec

ted

, em

pty

car

-tr

idg

es fi

red

by

po

lice

no

t co

l-le

cted

du

e to

flo

od

ing

in

th

e w

hea

t fi

eld

s.

3 p

oli

ce o

ffici

als

hit

on

th

eir

bu

llet

pro

of

jack

ets

by

the

bu

l-le

ts fi

red

by

the

crim

inal

s. J

ack

-et

s n

ot

par

cele

d a

nd

sea

led

fo

r fu

rth

er i

nve

stig

atio

n.

Po

st m

ort

em w

as c

on

du

cted

. N

oo

r M

oh

amm

ad’s

fam

ily

is

no

t aw

are

of

any

furt

her

in

ves-

tig

atio

n b

ein

g c

arri

ed o

ut

by

the

po

lice

.

71


13

Wa

see

m S

/o M

us-

tak

ee

n

28th

Sep

tem

ber

, 20

17.

Pla

ce:

Sar

oo

rpu

r,

Mee

rut

On

11.

9.2

017

, F

IR w

as r

egis

-te

red

by

Kai

ran

a P

S,

stat

ing

A

nu

j s/

o V

eerp

al w

as i

nju

red

in

po

lice

act

ion

an

d t

aken

in

to c

ust

od

y an

d W

asee

m

was

sh

ow

n a

s fl

eein

g t

he

sce-

ne

of

the

gu

nfi

gh

t.

On

28

.9.2

017

, in

form

atio

n

was

rec

eive

d b

y S

TF

, M

eeru

t th

at S

abir

alo

ng

wit

h W

asee

m

wer

e g

oin

g t

o c

om

mit

a c

rim

e in

Mee

rut.

Po

lice

set

up

bar

rica

des

to

ap

pre

hen

d t

he

crim

inal

s.

Tw

o p

eop

le o

n a

mo

torc

ycle

, tr

ied

to

flee

aft

er s

eein

g t

he

po

lice

, ch

ased

by

the

po

lice

, cr

imin

als

fire

d g

un

sh

ots

at

po

lice

, p

oli

ce fi

red

in

sel

f d

e-fe

nce

.

Was

eem

was

in

jure

d,

tak

en t

o

ho

spit

al, su

ccu

mb

ed t

o i

nju

-ri

es,

Sab

ir e

scap

ed,

cou

ld n

ot

be

arre

sted

.

As

per

po

lice

rec

ord

s, o

n

1.1.

2018

Sab

ir w

as k

ille

d i

n a

n

enco

un

ter

and

Ak

bar

was

sh

ow

n t

o h

ave

fled

th

e sc

ene.

PM

rep

ort

men

tio

ns

4 g

un

sh

ot

wo

un

ds

– o

ne

on

th

e le

ft s

ide

of

Was

eem

’s t

em-

ple

, o

ne

on

th

e u

pp

er l

eft

sid

e o

f h

is s

ho

uld

er,

on

e o

n

the

abd

om

en,

and

on

e o

n

the

left

wri

st.

Th

e g

un

sh

ots

are

at

ang

les

that

su

gg

est

it w

as fi

red

fr

om

clo

se r

ang

e an

d f

rom

ab

ove

. M

ild

bla

cken

ing

fo

un

d a

rou

nd

th

e w

ou

nd

in

dic

ate

extr

emel

y cl

ose

ra

ng

e fi

re.

Was

eem

’s m

oth

er s

tate

s th

at W

asee

m

was

no

t w

ith

An

uj

on

11/

09

/20

17 w

hen

th

e al

leg

ed c

lash

wit

h t

he

po

lice

to

ok

p

lace

. W

asee

m w

as w

ork

ing

as

a d

aily

w

age

earn

er o

uts

ide

of

U.P

.

Sh

e w

as f

alse

ly f

ram

ed o

n t

he

char

ge

of

traffi

ckin

g d

rug

s 6

day

s b

efo

re W

asee

m

was

mu

rder

ed.

An

in

form

er w

ork

ing

on

th

e b

idd

ing

of

the

po

lice

in

form

ed

Was

eem

of

his

mo

ther

’s a

rres

t. W

asee

m

cam

e to

Sh

amli

to

en

qu

ire

abo

ut

his

m

oth

er’s

wh

erea

bo

uts

. W

asee

m w

as

det

ain

ed b

y th

e p

oli

ce a

nd

tak

en t

o

Mee

rut,

wh

ere

his

sta

ged

en

cou

nte

r/m

urd

er w

as c

arri

ed o

ut.

On

24

.9.2

017

a

po

lice

co

nti

ng

ent

fro

m

Sh

amli

had

arr

ived

an

d v

and

alis

ed

Was

im’s

an

d h

is n

eig

hb

ou

r’s

ho

use

in

Ja

gh

anp

ura

vil

lag

e.

Fo

ur

day

s la

ter,

p

oli

ce c

alle

d t

he

vill

age

pra

dh

an t

o s

ay

that

Was

eem

had

bee

n s

ho

t d

ead

in

a

po

lice

en

cou

nte

r in

Sar

urp

ur

area

of

Mee

rut.

Was

eem

’s f

amil

y m

emb

ers

wer

e in

jai

l w

hen

Was

eem

was

kil

led

an

d t

hey

wer

e n

ot

allo

wed

to

att

end

his

fu

ner

al.

3 F

IRs

file

d a

t P

S S

aro

orp

ur

M

eeru

t D

istr

ict

agai

nst

Sab

ir

and

W

asee

m c

har

gin

g t

hem

u/

s 30

7 an

d S

ec 2

5 o

f A

rms

Act

.

Po

st M

ort

em w

as c

arri

ed o

ut

by

a te

am o

f d

oct

ors

an

d t

he

sam

e w

as v

ideo

gra

ph

ed b

y th

e p

oli

ce.

Was

eem

’s m

oth

er h

as s

ent

rep

-re

sen

tati

on

s to

NH

RC

an

d o

th-

er a

uth

ori

ties

. N

o r

esp

on

se y

et.


72

14.

Jaa

n M

oh

am

-m

ad

ali

as

Jaa

nu

s/o

Iq

-b

al

17.0

9.2

017

Pla

ce:

NH

-58

, P

S K

hat

oli

, D

ist

- M

uza

ffar

na-

gar

S.I

. S

ub

ey s

ing

h a

lon

gw

ith

5 o

ther

offi

cers

an

d S

I T

ej S

ing

h, P

S K

hat

oli

wit

h 3

oth

er

offi

cers

wer

e at

a c

hec

k p

ost

. A

t 5.

30 a

m a

w

hit

e co

lou

red

Sw

ift

car

had

bee

n c

om

-in

g f

rom

Mee

rut

sid

e th

ey g

esti

cula

te

wit

h t

orc

h l

igh

t to

sto

p t

hem

bu

t th

ey h

it

the

bar

rica

de

and

ran

aw

ay t

ow

ard

s M

u-

zafa

rnag

ar,

po

lice

th

en s

usp

ecte

d t

hem

to

b

e cr

imin

als

and

in

form

ed t

he

con

tro

l ro

om

. S

I S

ub

ey S

ing

h a

lon

gw

ith

5 o

ffice

rs

star

ted

fo

llo

win

g t

hem

. W

hen

po

lice

tr

ied

to

sto

p t

hem

nea

r K

hat

oli

tu

rn,

the

accu

sed

fire

d o

n t

hem

wit

h t

he

inte

nti

on

to

kil

l th

em.

Th

e p

oli

ce t

hen

man

aged

to

o

vert

ake

the

susp

ecte

d c

ar,

and

th

e ac

-cu

sed

’s c

ar c

oll

ided

wit

h p

ipe

of

a ti

n

shad

e. W

hen

po

lice

men

go

t o

ut

of

thei

r je

ep a

nd

acc

use

d s

tart

ed fi

rin

g o

n t

he

po

lice

wh

ere

Co

Dee

pak

an

d C

o S

oh

anvi

r w

ere

inju

red

. F

or

the

self

def

ence

SI

gav

e th

e o

rder

to

fire

bac

k.

On

e o

f th

e ac

cuse

d

man

aged

to

get

ou

t o

f th

e ca

r an

d r

an

away

to

war

ds

the

fiel

ds

wh

erea

s o

ther

o

ne

sitt

ing

at

the

dri

vin

g s

eat

trie

d t

o e

s-ca

pe

bu

t h

e g

ot

inju

red

. P

oli

ce w

ent

clo

se

to t

he

inju

red

acc

use

d w

her

e th

ey f

ou

nd

th

at h

e is

Jan

nu

@ J

aan

Mo

ham

mad

s/o

Iq

bal

, a

wan

ted

cri

min

al w

ho

esc

aped

in

p

oli

ce c

lash

on

11/

09

/20

17.

Fo

ren

sic

de-

par

tmen

t w

as c

alle

d f

or

inve

stig

atio

n.

Th

e in

jure

d p

oli

ce o

ffice

rs w

ere

sen

ty t

o

CH

C K

hat

oli

fo

r tr

eatm

ent

and

dea

d

bo

dy

of

Jaan

Mo

ham

mad

was

sen

t to

Dis

t H

osp

ital

, M

uza

ffar

nag

ar..

Th

e p

oli

ce r

e-co

vere

d 2

gu

ns

fro

m n

ear

the

accu

sed

an

d

13 b

ull

et s

hel

ls.

Th

e p

oli

ce fi

red

13

bu

llet

s at

th

e ac

cuse

d p

erso

ns,

th

ey w

ere

able

to

re

cove

r 6

bu

llet

sh

ells

fire

d b

y th

em.

No

det

ails

ava

ilab

le.

Jaan

Mo

hd

.’s f

amil

y st

ates

th

at h

e w

as i

n p

ris-

on

fo

r 2

year

s an

d w

as o

ut

on

bai

l 5

mo

nth

s ag

o.

Sin

ce p

oli

ce h

ad s

tart

ed h

aras

sin

g h

im

and

his

fam

ily

agai

n,

he

had

to

lea

ve h

is

ho

use

in

th

e vi

llag

e an

d s

tay

away

. P

oli

ce

raid

ed h

is h

ou

se o

n o

ne

occ

asio

n a

t n

igh

t an

d t

oo

k a

way

so

me

ho

use

ho

ld t

hin

gs

in-

clu

din

g t

hei

r m

ob

ile

ph

on

es.

Fam

ily

says

po

-li

ce h

ad t

hre

aten

ed t

o k

ill

Jaan

Md

.

On

15.

9.2

017

, J

aan

Md

vis

ited

his

law

yer

Ad

v.

Saj

id i

n M

eeru

t to

su

rren

der

him

self

in

co

urt

. B

ut

as c

ou

rt t

imin

gs

wer

e o

ver

for

the

day

, la

wye

r as

ked

him

to

co

me

on

Mo

nd

ay.

Jaan

M

d. th

en w

ent

to A

yyu

b (

his

co

usi

n)’

s h

ou

se

in v

illa

ge

Kai

thw

ari,

Mee

rut

to s

eek

his

hel

p

to s

urr

end

er.

Po

lice

rai

ded

Ayy

ub

’s h

ou

se

and

lat

er i

t w

as h

eard

th

at J

aan

Md

. h

as b

een

en

cou

nte

red

.

Fam

ily

says

th

at J

aan

Md

. d

id n

ot

kn

ow

ho

w

to r

ide

a ca

r. A

lso

, w

hen

he

was

pla

nn

ing

to

h

imse

lf s

urr

end

er b

efo

re t

he

cou

rt,

then

wh

y w

ou

ld h

e p

lan

to

co

mm

it a

ny

crim

e.

Yo

un

ger

bro

ther

Fer

oz

is n

ow

bei

ng

im

pli

cat-

ed i

n t

he

case

s w

her

e Ja

an M

d. w

as e

arli

er

accu

sed

. H

e is

cu

rren

tly

in p

riso

n; fa

mil

y is

n

ot

app

lyin

g f

or

bai

l o

ut

of

fear

th

at p

oli

ce

wil

l k

ill

him

in

an

en

cou

nte

r if

he

com

es o

ut

of

jail

.

Fiv

e d

ays

afte

r th

e en

cou

nte

r, p

oli

ce r

aid

ed

the

fam

ily’

s o

ne

roo

m h

ou

se i

n t

he

vill

age

and

van

dal

ised

it.

Th

ree

FIR

s (F

IR N

o.s

12

27/1

7, 1

228

/18

an

d

1229

/17)

hav

e b

een

file

d

by

PS

Kh

atau

li,

Mee

rut

agai

nst

Jaa

n M

d.

and

un

-k

no

wn

acc

use

d d

ated

17

.9.2

017

. H

e h

as b

een

ac

cuse

d u

nd

er I

PC

sec

tio

n

307,

Arm

s A

ct s

ecti

on

s 25

an

d 2

7 an

d I

PC

sec

tio

n

414

res

pec

tive

ly.

73


V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

et

al

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

-d

en

t In

juri

es

on

th

e b

od

y

Fa

mil

y t

est

imo

ny

L

eg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

15

Qa

sim

s/o

Su

mra

t

02

Au

gu

st 2

017

Pla

ce:

Nea

r h

is

ho

use

, in

vil

lag

e B

is-

amb

hra

, C

hh

ata,

dis

-tr

ict

Mat

hu

ra,

UP

Info

rmat

ion

no

t av

aila

ble

. In

form

atio

n n

ot

avai

lab

le.

Qas

im w

as r

un

nin

g a

ch

ak

ki

sho

p i

n t

he

vill

age

for

the

pas

t 10

yea

rs.

His

fam

ily

stat

es t

hat

Qas

im w

as a

cqu

itte

d i

n a

ll

crim

inal

cas

es a

t th

e ti

me

of

this

in

ci-

den

t.

Po

lice

cam

e in

to t

he

vill

age

on

ear

ly

ho

urs

of

2nd

Au

gu

st 2

017

, lo

ok

ing

fo

r S

ahu

n (

a k

no

wn

cri

min

al)

wh

o m

an-

aged

to

esc

ape.

Qas

im a

nd

his

mo

ther

h

ad r

etu

rned

ho

me

very

lat

e fr

om

a

ho

spit

al. Q

asim

was

in

his

ho

use

, w

hen

p

oli

ce s

tart

ed fi

rin

g a

t h

is h

ou

se.

He

was

hit

by

a p

oli

ce b

ull

et b

ut

he

trie

d t

o

esca

pe.

His

mo

ther

cla

rifi

ed t

o t

he

po

-li

ce t

hat

its

Qas

im a

nd

no

t S

ahu

n.

Qas

im r

an t

ow

ard

s th

e ro

of

of

the

nei

gh

bo

urs

. E

ven

nei

gh

bo

urs

tri

ed t

o

clar

ify

to t

he

po

lice

, b

ut

they

wer

e as

ked

to

go

in

sid

e an

d c

lose

th

eir

do

ors

. P

oli

ce fi

red

a r

ang

e o

f b

ull

ets.

Qas

im

was

hit

an

d h

e fe

ll fl

at o

n t

he

roo

f. A

m

oth

er f

eed

ing

her

bab

y in

th

e n

eig

h-

bo

uri

ng

ho

use

wen

t u

nco

nsc

iou

s d

ue

to

the

sou

nd

s o

f th

e g

un

fire

.

Fam

ily

has

en

gag

ed a

law

yer.

N

o f

urt

her

in

form

atio

n a

vail

a-b

le.


74

16.

Na

ush

ad

@

Da

nn

y s

/o

Jam

il

Sa

rva

r s/

o

Ka

mil

29th

Ju

ly 2

017

Pla

ce:

Bh

ura

, P

S

Kai

ran

a, S

ham

li

At

aro

un

d 3

.15

am o

n 2

9.7

.20

19,

SO

Dh

ar-

men

dra

Sin

gh

Paw

ar P

S K

aira

na

alo

ng

wit

h

3 p

oli

ce o

ffice

rs (

PO

) m

et a

n i

nfo

rmer

on

th

e ro

ad w

ho

to

ld h

im t

hat

Nau

shad

an

d

his

acc

om

pli

ce w

ill

com

e n

ear

the

Mas

jid

n

ext

to t

he

gra

veya

rd b

etw

een

4-5

am

. T

hey

are

hea

vily

arm

ed a

nd

are

pla

nn

ing

to

co

mm

it a

cri

me.

SO

cal

led

fo

r ad

dit

ion

al

forc

e, a

nd

In

sp R

aj K

um

ar S

har

ma

Cri

me

Bra

nch

, a

lon

g w

ith

8 o

ffice

rs a

nd

SO

PS

Jh

ijh

ana

Bh

agw

at S

ing

h a

lon

g w

ith

4 o

ffic-

ers

reac

hed

th

e sp

ot.

Th

ey t

oo

k t

hei

r p

osi

-ti

on

s in

tw

o t

eam

s w

aiti

ng

fo

r th

e cr

imi-

nal

s. A

t 4

.10

am

th

ey s

aw t

wo

peo

ple

wal

k-

ing

in

th

eir

dir

ecti

on

an

d o

ne

of

them

was

ca

rryi

ng

a g

un

. T

he

info

rmer

id

enti

fied

th

e cr

imin

als.

SO

PS

Kai

ran

a as

ked

th

e cr

imi-

nal

s to

sto

p.

Bo

th t

he

crim

inal

s st

arte

d

sho

oti

ng

at

the

po

lice

par

ty.

Th

e o

ther

po

-li

ce p

arty

als

o a

sked

th

em t

o s

top

th

eir

fire

, o

n h

eari

ng

th

at t

he

crim

inal

s st

arte

d

turn

ing

aro

un

d a

nd

sh

oo

tin

g a

t th

e p

oli

ce

par

ties

on

bo

th s

ides

. S

SI

San

dee

p B

aliy

an

go

t h

it b

y th

e b

ull

et o

n h

is s

tom

ach

. S

O

then

gav

e th

e p

oli

ce o

rder

s to

sh

oo

t at

th

e cr

imin

als,

bo

th t

he

crim

inal

s g

ot

sho

t an

d

fell

do

wn

. C

o.

Nar

esh

Ku

mar

an

d C

o.

San

dee

p K

um

ar i

den

tifi

ed t

he

crim

inal

s as

N

aush

ad &

Sar

var.

Th

e p

oli

ce r

eco

vere

d 4

g

un

s fr

om

th

e ac

cuse

d,

wh

ich

was

bei

ng

u

sed

by

them

to

fire

at

the

po

lice

an

d 2

2 b

ull

et s

hel

ls fi

red

by

the

accu

sed

. T

he

po

-li

ce a

lso

rec

ove

red

14

bu

llet

sh

ells

fire

d b

y th

em.

Th

e ac

cuse

d w

ere

sen

t to

CH

C J

hin

-jh

ana

for

trea

tmen

t. W

hil

e S

arva

r d

ied

on

th

e w

ay t

o t

he

ho

spit

al,

Nau

shad

die

d d

ur-

ing

tre

atm

ent.

Inju

red

po

lice

offi

cers

- S

O P

S J

hij

han

a B

hag

wat

Sin

gh

, S

SI

San

dee

p B

aliy

an,

SI

Ad

esh

Ku

mar

, C

o R

aju

Tya

gi,

Co

Ash

ish

K

um

ar.

Th

ey w

ere

sen

t to

CH

C J

hin

jhan

a fo

r tr

eatm

ent.

Th

e fa

mil

ies

of

Nau

shad

&

Sar

var

shar

e th

at b

oth

of

them

had

sev

ere

tort

ure

w

ou

nd

s an

d b

rok

en b

on

es.

Mo

reo

ver,

Sar

var

rece

ived

a

bu

llet

sh

ot

in h

is m

ou

th

and

Nau

shad

in

his

ch

est

on

th

e le

ft s

ide.

Th

e fa

mil

ies

hav

e n

ot

yet

bee

n g

iven

th

e P

ost

Mo

r-te

m R

epo

rt.

Lo

cal

vill

ager

s, f

amil

y m

emb

ers

shar

e th

at N

aush

ad a

nd

Sar

var

wer

e ca

lled

to

o

ne

Yas

mee

n a

lias

Ran

o’s

ho

use

fo

r d

in-

ner

. S

he

per

son

ally

lan

ded

up

at

thei

r h

ou

ses

to i

nsi

st f

or

the

mee

tin

g. N

ext

day

by

earl

y m

orn

ing

, n

ews

spre

ad t

hat

th

ey w

ere

kil

led

in

an

en

cou

nte

r.

Yas

mee

n a

lias

Ran

o h

as fi

led

FIR

No

. 73

2/20

17 d

t 4

.8.2

017

at

PS

Kai

ran

a u

/s

452

, 37

6D

, 32

3 an

d 5

06

IP

C

alle

gin

g

sexu

al v

iole

nce

ag

ain

st N

aush

ad,

Sar

var

and

th

eir

bro

ther

s an

d o

ther

fam

ily

mem

ber

s. Y

asm

een

has

sta

ted

in

her

F

IR t

hat

Nau

shad

an

d S

arva

r ca

me

to

her

ho

use

man

y ti

mes

wit

h d

iffer

ent

peo

ple

so

me

of

them

nam

ed I

kra

m a

nd

H

amid

, In

am,

Bil

al, A

fsar

, N

awab

, an

d

oth

ers

(wh

o w

ere

un

kn

ow

n t

o h

er)

and

th

ey a

ll r

aped

her

mu

ltip

le t

imes

.

FIR

No

. (6

80

, 6

81

and

68

2) w

ere

file

d a

gai

nst

Nau

shad

& S

arva

r at

PS

Kai

ran

a, d

t 29

/7/1

7, u

/s

307

IPC

an

d S

ecti

on

25

Arm

s A

ct.

A P

ost

Mo

rtem

was

co

nd

uct

ed.

Th

e fa

mil

y h

as n

o f

urt

her

in

for-

mat

ion

ab

ou

t th

e in

vest

igat

ion

ca

rrie

d o

ut

by

the

po

lice

. T

hey

h

ave

no

t p

urs

ued

an

y le

gal

ac-

tio

n a

gai

nst

th

e p

oli

ce o

ffice

rs

fear

ing

th

at o

ther

fam

ily

mem

-b

ers

wo

uld

als

o g

et i

mp

lica

ted

u

nd

er t

he

fals

e ch

arg

e o

f se

xual

vi

ole

nce

.

75


ANNEXE-IV

Ex

tra

jud

icia

l E

xe

cuti

on

ca

ses

in H

ary

an

a

(lis

ted

ch

ron

olo

gic

all

y)

S.N

o.

Vic

tim

(s),

In

cid

en

t P

oli

ce v

ers

ion

of

the

in

cid

en

t F

am

ily

’s t

est

imo

ny

L

eg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

1.

Tal

im,

age

22 y

ears

s/o

Sh

. S

har

if

r/o

Vil

lag

e S

alah

eri,

Dis

tric

t N

uh

, H

arya

na

7 D

ec 2

017

at a

rou

nd

2.1

5 a.

m

nea

r Ja

nta

Co

lon

y in

Alw

ar,

Raj

asth

an

Taa

lim

was

a d

rive

r b

y p

rofe

s-si

on

, w

ork

ing

wit

h h

is s

iste

r’s

hu

sban

d.

He

use

d t

o c

arry

g

oo

ds

rela

ted

to

mac

hin

e p

arts

on

th

e N

uh

-A

lwar

, an

d

som

etim

es t

o f

araw

ay c

itie

s li

ke

Ko

lkat

a. H

e w

as m

arri

ed,

wit

h t

wo

kid

s ag

ed 3

yea

rs o

ld

and

7 m

on

ths

old

.

Taa

lim

had

no

his

tory

of

crim

-in

al r

eco

rd.

Raj

asth

an P

oli

ce c

laim

s th

at o

n

7.12

.20

18,

at a

rou

nd

2:0

0 a

.m.,

a

nig

ht

pat

roll

ing

tea

m r

elay

ed t

o

the

Co

ntr

ol

Ro

om

th

at a

gro

up

of

smu

gg

lers

, o

f ab

ou

t 5-

7 p

eop

le,

wer

e lo

adin

g c

ow

s in

a T

ata

40

7 tr

uck

bea

rin

g r

egis

trat

ion

nu

mb

er

HR

38E

-60

08

(“T

ruck

”),

nea

r a

cer-

tain

Dev

yan

i R

anaw

at H

osp

ital

in

A

rava

li V

ihar

, A

lwar

. S

ub

seq

uen

t-ly

, w

hen

th

e o

ffici

als

of

the

Ara

vali

V

ihar

po

lice

sta

tio

n t

ried

to

sto

p

the

alle

ged

sm

ug

gle

rs a

t ch

eck

-p

oin

ts,

they

eva

ded

su

ch a

ttem

pts

an

d d

rove

aw

ay.

Th

ere

was

ex-

chan

ge

of

fire

bet

wee

n t

he

po

lice

an

d t

he

accu

sed

- 3

ro

un

ds

by

the

accu

sed

wh

ile

7 ro

un

ds

wer

e fi

red

b

y th

e p

oli

ce.

Th

e T

ruck

was

lat

er

fou

nd

to

be

aban

do

ned

at

Jan

ta

Co

lon

y, w

ith

Mr.

Tal

im’s

dea

d

bo

dy

lod

ged

bet

wee

n t

wo

sea

ts.

All

th

e o

ther

acc

use

d h

ad fl

ed.

Th

e P

oli

ce r

eco

vere

d fi

ve c

ow

s fr

om

th

e T

ruck

. T

hey

als

o r

eco

vere

d a

co

un

try-

mad

e p

isto

l, a

mo

bil

e p

ho

ne,

a d

iary

an

d l

ive

cart

rid

ges

. T

he

on

ly i

nju

ry s

uff

ered

by

any

mem

ber

of

the

po

lice

par

ty w

as t

o

SI

Dev

end

ra P

rata

p,

wh

o w

as h

it i

n

the

leg

by

on

e o

f th

e st

on

es t

hat

w

ere

bei

ng

pel

ted

by

the

accu

sed

.

Wh

en T

alim

did

no

t re

turn

ho

me

that

nig

ht,

nex

t d

ay e

arly

m

orn

ing

fam

ily

trie

d t

o c

all

on

his

ph

on

e. A

fter

sev

eral

ri

ng

s, p

ho

ne

was

an

swer

ed b

y a

stra

ng

er w

ho

wo

rked

in

a

ho

spit

al i

n A

lwar

. H

e fo

un

d t

he

ph

on

e o

n t

he

road

sid

e.

In

few

ho

urs

, fa

mil

y fo

un

d o

ut

abo

ut

the

enco

un

ter

of

Tal

im t

hro

ug

h s

oci

al m

edia

. W

hen

th

e fa

mil

y r

each

ed

Raj

iv G

and

hi

Go

vern

men

t H

osp

ital

, A

lwar

Ho

spit

al o

ffici

als

refu

sed

to

sh

ow

th

e T

alim

’s b

od

y. L

ater

, w

hen

fam

ily

met

p

oli

ce,

they

wer

e th

reat

ened

of

con

seq

uen

ces

alle

gin

g t

hat

al

l o

f th

e fa

mil

y is

in

volv

ed i

n c

ow

sm

ug

gli

ng

. P

oli

ce r

e-fu

sed

to

file

FIR

. F

amil

y sa

ys t

hat

SP

to

ld t

hem

‘hu

mn

e h

aa

-th

on

mei

n c

ho

ori

yan

na

hi

peh

ni

ha

in’ [

we

(po

lice

) ar

e n

ot

wea

rin

g b

ang

les

in o

ur

han

ds]

, in

dic

atin

g t

hat

th

ey w

ill

tak

e ‘a

ctio

n’ a

gai

nst

th

ose

wh

o a

re i

nvo

lved

in

co

w s

mu

g-

gli

ng

.

Wh

at w

as t

he

bas

is o

f in

form

atio

n t

hat

led

th

e p

oli

ce t

o

bel

ieve

th

at t

he

accu

sed

wer

e sm

ug

gle

rs o

r th

at t

he

cow

s w

ere

bei

ng

tra

nsp

ort

ed f

or

the

pu

rpo

se o

f sl

aug

hte

r? T

he

mer

e ac

t o

f tr

ansp

ort

ing

co

ws

is n

ot

a cr

ime.

Th

e p

oli

ce c

laim

s th

at 5

-7 p

eop

le a

nd

5 c

ow

s w

ere

invo

lved

w

ho

wer

e ri

din

g t

he

Tat

a 4

07

Tru

ck.

Th

is t

ruck

has

a s

eat-

ing

cap

acit

y o

f 3.

Eve

n i

f it

is

assu

med

th

at s

om

eho

w 5

-7

peo

ple

cra

mm

ed i

nto

th

e se

atin

g s

pac

e, t

he

chan

ces

of

a b

ull

et h

itti

ng

ju

st a

sin

gle

per

son

are

ver

y lo

w.

Th

e p

oli

ce h

as c

laim

ed t

hat

Mr.

Tal

im w

as d

rivi

ng

in

a s

to-

len

tru

ck.

Ho

w w

as t

his

in

form

atio

n a

vail

able

bef

ore

han

d

to t

he

po

lice

? F

urt

her

mo

re,

even

if

the

ow

ner

ship

of

the

Tru

ck i

s n

ot

in M

r. T

alim

’s n

ame,

th

e sa

me

is e

nti

rely

pla

u-

sib

le s

ince

Mr.

Tal

im w

as a

dri

ver

by

pro

fess

ion

.

Fam

ily

was

no

t in

form

ed

abo

ut

the

dea

th o

f T

alim

by

the

po

lice

. F

amil

y h

as n

ot

bee

n g

iven

a c

op

y o

f F

IR fi

led

ag

ain

st T

alim

an

d p

ost

-m

ort

em r

epo

rt o

f T

alim

.

Th

e p

oli

ce fi

led

th

e F

IR N

o.

539

/17

at t

he

Ara

vali

Vih

ar

Po

lice

Sta

tio

n a

gai

nst

acc

use

d

(in

clu

din

g T

alim

) u

nd

er s

ec-

tio

ns

332,

353

, 14

3 an

d 3

07

of

the

Ind

ian

Pen

al C

od

e, 1

86

0.

Sec

tio

ns

3 an

d 2

5 o

f th

e A

rms

Act

, 19

59.

Sec

tio

ns

3, 5

an

d 8

o

f th

e R

ajas

than

Bo

vin

e A

ni-

mal

(P

roh

ibit

ion

of

Sla

ug

hte

r an

d R

egu

lati

on

of

Tem

po

rary

M

igra

tio

n o

r E

xpo

rt)

Act

, 19

95.

An

in

vest

igat

ion

by

CB

-C

ID i

s u

nd

erw

ay.

Fam

ily

has

file

d a

pet

itio

n i

n

Ses

sio

ns

Co

urt

, A

lwar

un

der

se

ctio

n 1

56(3

) o

f C

r.P

C s

eek

-in

g r

egis

trat

ion

of

com

pla

int

un

der

sec

tio

n 3

02

and

14

9 o

f IP

C a

gai

nst

SI

Dev

end

ra

Pra

tap

of

PS

NE

B A

lwar

, H

ead

Co

nst

able

Isr

av K

han

, R

an S

ing

h,

Rak

esh

, Ja

ikis

han

, M

uk

esh

Kr.

(h

ead

co

nst

able

s)

un

der

sec

tio

ns

302,

14

9 o

f IP

C

for

kil

lin

g T

alim

.


76

S.N

o.

Vic

tim

, In

cid

en

t P

oli

ce v

ers

ion

of

the

in

cid

en

t F

am

ily

’s t

est

imo

ny

L

eg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

2.

Mu

nfa

id,

age

earl

y 20

s

s/o

Mr.

Isl

am H

uss

ain

r/o

Sal

ahed

i vi

llag

e, T

auru

, N

uh

dis

tric

t, H

arya

na

16 S

ep 2

017

at

aro

un

d 2

:45

a.m

. n

ear

Tao

ru G

hat

i, D

istr

ict

Nu

h, H

arya

na

Mu

nfa

id w

as a

dri

ver

and

fa

rmer

by

pro

fess

ion

. H

e w

as

un

der

in

vest

igat

ion

fo

r al

leg

a-ti

on

s o

f se

xual

har

assm

ent.

Insp

ecto

r M

asta

na

stat

ed t

hat

, o

n

16.0

9.2

017

, ar

ou

nd

2:4

5 a.

m.,

wh

ilst

o

n p

atro

llin

g d

uty

, h

e ca

me

acro

ss

a st

atio

nar

y w

hit

e p

ick

up

tru

ck

nea

r T

auru

Gh

hat

i. O

n f

urt

her

in

-sp

ecti

on

, h

e fo

un

d a

yo

un

g p

erso

n

gri

evo

usl

y in

jure

d,

tho

ug

h s

till

al

ive,

in

sid

e th

e tr

uck

. H

e im

med

i-at

ely

tran

spo

rted

th

e in

jure

d t

o

Nal

had

Ho

spit

al,

Nu

h i

n h

is o

ffici

al

veh

icle

. T

he

per

son

, u

nid

enti

fied

at

th

e ti

me,

was

dec

lare

d d

ead

on

ar

riva

l w

ith

bu

llet

in

juri

es t

o h

is

nec

k.

Th

e fa

mil

y h

as s

tate

d t

hat

Mu

nfa

id u

sed

to

be

in c

on

stan

t to

uch

wit

h t

he

IO i

n t

he

FIR

file

d a

gai

nst

him

. O

n

15.0

9.2

017

, M

un

faid

cal

led

his

fat

her

an

d h

is f

ath

er-i

n-l

aw

info

rmin

g t

hem

th

at h

e h

ad r

ecei

ved

a c

all

fro

m s

om

e p

o-

lice

offi

cers

of

CIA

nam

ely,

Vik

ran

t S

hak

ti S

ing

h,

Sat

ish

an

d

Sid

dh

arth

wh

o h

ad o

ffer

ed t

o c

lose

th

e p

end

ing

cas

es

agai

nst

him

in

ret

urn

fo

r so

me

wo

rk t

hat

th

ey w

ante

d M

un

-fa

id t

o d

o.

His

fam

ily

advi

sed

him

to

mee

t th

e p

oli

ce o

ffic-

ers.

Th

at d

ay,

at a

rou

nd

5:0

0 p

.m.,

Mu

nfa

id l

eft

for

Rew

ari

to m

eet

wit

h t

he

po

lice

offi

cial

s al

on

g w

ith

his

th

ree

frie

nd

s. T

hes

e ey

e w

itn

esse

s in

form

ed t

he

vill

ager

s th

at a

g

reen

Bo

lero

car

sto

pp

ed i

n f

ron

t o

f th

e ve

hic

le n

ear

Sh

on

kh

vil

lag

e w

her

e th

ey s

tart

ed fi

rin

g a

t th

em.

Mu

nfa

id

was

sh

ot

wh

ilst

th

e re

st w

ere

able

to

esc

ape.

Th

e vi

llag

ers

livi

ng

nea

rby

hav

e al

so a

ttes

ted

to

th

e fa

ct t

hat

aro

un

d

12:0

0 a

.m.

they

had

see

n a

Bo

lero

wit

h p

oli

ce l

igh

ts w

as

seen

ap

pro

ach

ing

th

e p

lace

of

the

inci

den

t. M

r. M

un

faid

w

as f

ou

nd

dea

d b

y In

spec

tor

Mas

tan

a at

aro

un

d 2

:30

a.m

. th

e n

ext

day

. F

amil

y al

so c

laim

s th

at w

hen

th

ey r

each

ed t

he

Co

mm

un

ity

Hea

lth

Cen

tre,

Nu

h w

her

e M

r. M

un

faid

’s b

od

y w

as k

ept

on

16

.09

.20

17,

they

no

tice

d t

hat

th

e p

oli

ce w

ere

tryi

ng

to

tam

per

wit

h t

he

bo

dy

to r

emo

ve e

vid

ence

.

On

16

.09

.20

17,

FIR

No

. 0

358

w

as fi

led

at

Po

lice

Sta

tio

n

Tau

ru,

Dis

tric

t N

uh

, H

arya

na

agai

nst

un

kn

ow

n p

erso

ns

un

der

sec

tio

ns

302

and

20

1 o

f th

e In

dia

n P

enal

Co

de,

186

0

and

Sec

tio

n 2

5 o

f th

e A

rms

Act

, 19

59.

MA

NG

LA

A c

rim

inal

wri

t p

etit

ion

has

b

een

file

d b

y th

e fa

mil

y in

P

un

jab

& H

arya

na

Hig

h

Co

urt

, C

han

dig

arh

see

kin

g

reg

istr

atio

n o

f co

mp

lain

t ag

ain

st p

oli

ce o

ffice

rs o

f C

IA

for

kil

lin

g M

un

faid

.

77


3.

Nas

eem

, ag

e 27

yea

rs o

ld

s/o

Id

ris

r/o

Vil

lag

e A

db

ar,

dis

tric

t N

uh

, H

arya

na

20 A

ug

ust

20

16,

aro

un

d m

id-

nig

ht

nea

r K

ho

ri v

illa

ge,

bef

ore

Bh

i-w

adi

in A

lwar

dis

tric

t, R

aja-

sth

an.

He

was

mar

ried

an

d h

ad t

hre

e ch

ild

ren

ag

ed 5

yea

rs o

ld,

3 ye

ars

old

an

d a

nd

an

yea

r o

ld.

His

yo

un

ges

t ch

ild

was

bo

rn

afte

r h

is d

eath

. N

asee

m w

as

an e

lect

rici

an a

nd

had

a s

ho

p

in t

he

tow

n.

At

the

tim

e o

f th

is i

nci

den

t,

Nas

eem

was

on

bai

l. T

he

case

w

as r

elat

ed t

o a

fig

ht

wh

ich

h

app

ened

at

his

sh

op

. F

amil

y o

f N

asee

m s

ays

that

his

fr

ien

ds

trav

elin

g i

n t

hat

veh

i-cl

e h

ad o

ther

cri

min

al c

ases

o

n t

hem

an

d t

hey

wer

e k

no

wn

to

th

e p

oli

ce b

efo

re t

he

inci

-d

ent.

As

per

th

e fa

mil

y, p

oli

ce d

id n

ot

reg

iste

r an

y ca

se r

elat

ed t

o t

he

in-

cid

ent.

7 p

eop

le (

r/o

Ad

bar

an

d o

ther

vil

lag

es)

wer

e tr

avel

ing

in

a

pic

k u

p v

ehic

le a

rou

nd

mid

nig

ht.

Bh

iwad

i C

ob

ra f

orc

e, i

n a

S

wif

t D

esir

e ve

hic

le,

sho

t at

th

em n

ear

Kh

ori

vil

lag

e, b

efo

re

Bh

iwad

i. N

asee

m w

as s

itti

ng

in

mid

dle

, in

fro

nt

sid

e o

f th

e p

ick

up

veh

icle

. O

ne

sho

t w

as fi

red

on

him

wh

en h

e w

as

tryi

ng

to

lo

ok

bac

k f

rom

th

e w

ind

ow

in

th

e m

idd

le o

f th

e ve

hic

le.

Th

is h

it h

im f

rom

th

e fr

on

t, b

ull

et w

ent

thro

ug

h

fro

m t

he

left

sh

ou

lder

. F

amil

y w

as i

nfo

rmed

wh

en f

rien

ds

retu

rned

bac

k w

ith

in

jure

d N

asee

m.

He

was

tak

en t

o a

pri

vate

ho

spit

al (

situ

ated

on

Del

hi

road

, o

pp

osi

te B

alaj

i p

etro

l p

um

p),

bu

t fa

mil

y w

as s

oo

n a

sked

to

ta

ke

Nas

eem

to

oth

er h

osp

ital

. B

ut

Nas

eem

pas

sed

aw

ay

bef

ore

th

ey c

ou

ld r

each

to

th

e g

ove

rnm

ent

ho

spit

al.

Nas

eem

nar

rate

d t

he

inci

den

t to

th

e fa

mil

y b

efo

re h

e p

asse

d a

way

. F

amil

y ea

rlie

r w

ent

to t

he

pri

vate

ho

spit

al

thin

kin

g g

ove

rnm

ent

ho

spit

als

do

n’t

tre

at w

ell.

Eve

ryb

od

y in

th

e vi

llag

e, e

ven

ch

ild

ren

kn

ow

th

at h

e w

as

kil

led

by

gu

n.

Vil

lag

e el

der

s, s

ug

ges

ted

th

at s

ince

cas

es

agai

nst

po

lice

are

diffi

cult

to

pu

rsu

e. A

lso

, N

asee

m’s

fat

her

fe

ared

th

at p

oli

ce w

ill

imp

lica

te h

im o

r N

asee

m’s

bro

ther

s in

fal

se c

ases

. H

ence

, fa

mil

y d

id n

ot

atte

mp

t to

reg

iste

r F

IR

or

get

th

e p

ost

-mo

rtem

co

nd

uct

ed.

Aft

er N

asee

m,

his

fa-

ther

’s m

eag

re o

ld a

ge

pen

sio

n o

f R

s. 1

60

0 i

s th

e o

nly

so

urc

e o

f in

com

e fo

r N

asee

m’s

wif

e an

d c

hil

dre

n.

No

leg

al p

roce

edin

gs.


78

S.N

o.

Vic

tim

, In

cid

en

t P

oli

ce v

ers

ion

of

the

in

cid

en

t F

am

ily

’s t

est

imo

ny

L

eg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

4.

Ru

dd

ar

s/o

(la

te)

Usm

aan

an

d F

azri

.

r/o

vil

lag

e U

taw

ar,

blo

ck H

a-th

in,

dis

tric

t P

alw

al,

Har

yan

a.

May

20

16,

nig

ht.

nea

r B

hat

en v

illa

ge,

Ko

si,

dis

-tr

ict

Mat

hu

ra,

UP

Ru

dd

ar u

sed

to

ru

n a

gro

cery

an

d m

ob

ile

sho

p i

n t

he

vill

age.

He

was

mar

ried

, h

ad a

3 y

ears

o

ld s

on

. H

e w

as t

he

sole

b

read

win

ner

of

the

fam

ily

wh

ich

als

o i

ncl

ud

ed h

is a

gin

g

mo

ther

an

d t

hre

e yo

un

ger

si

bli

ng

s.

Info

rmat

ion

no

t av

aila

ble

. R

ud

dar

an

d h

is o

ther

fri

end

s w

ere

retu

rnin

g t

o t

he

vill

age

in a

pic

ku

p v

ehic

le a

fter

sel

lin

g c

attl

e. A

po

lice

veh

icle

was

p

ark

ed n

ear

Bh

aten

vil

lag

e, K

osi

, d

istr

ict

Mat

hu

ra,

UP

at

a p

lace

wh

ere

sin

gle

ro

ad m

eets

th

e D

elh

i-A

gra

Hig

hw

ay.

Po

lice

dir

ecte

d t

hem

to

sto

p t

hei

r ve

hic

le,

bu

t th

ey d

idn

’t

sto

p.

Po

lice

sta

rted

to

fo

llo

w a

nd

fire

at

them

. R

ud

dar

was

h

it b

y o

ne

bu

llet

. H

e w

as s

itti

ng

on

th

e co

nd

uct

or

sid

e o

f th

e ve

hic

le.

Eve

ryb

od

y g

ot

ou

t o

f th

e ve

hic

le a

nd

tri

ed t

o

esca

pe.

Sh

arif

was

als

o h

it b

y th

e b

ull

et i

n h

is r

igh

t le

g.

Ru

dd

ar c

alle

d h

is f

amil

y an

d h

is f

rien

d,

Sab

ir.

He

told

th

em

wh

at h

ad h

app

ened

an

d a

sked

fo

r h

elp

. B

ut

he

was

per

hap

s co

nfu

sed

ab

ou

t h

is l

oca

tio

n.

He

info

rmed

th

e fa

mil

y th

at h

e is

in

a j

un

gle

nea

r so

an

d s

o v

illa

ge,

bu

t th

e fa

mil

y co

uld

n’t

fi

nd

him

. M

ean

wh

ile,

Ru

dd

ar’s

ph

on

e w

as s

wit

ched

off

by

then

. N

ext

mo

rnin

g f

amil

y re

ceiv

ed a

cal

l fr

om

Ko

si P

S t

hat

h

is b

od

y h

as b

een

fo

un

d n

ear

ano

ther

vil

lag

e. W

hen

R

ud

dar

’s f

amil

y en

qu

ired

ab

ou

t h

is b

od

y, t

hey

wer

e th

reat

-en

ed a

nd

to

ld t

o b

e si

len

t, s

ince

a l

ot

of

med

ia w

as p

rese

nt

on

th

e sp

ot

at t

hat

tim

e. L

ater

at

nig

ht

that

day

po

lice

gav

e th

e b

od

y to

th

e fa

mil

y. R

ud

dar

’s p

ost

mo

rtem

was

co

nd

uct

-ed

in

th

e M

ath

ura

Dis

tric

t H

osp

ital

. B

ut

the

rep

ort

has

no

t b

een

giv

en t

o t

he

fam

ily.

Fam

ily

has

no

t b

een

giv

en a

co

py

of

FIR

file

d a

gai

nst

R

ud

dar

an

d h

is f

rien

ds.

Fam

i-ly

was

als

o n

ot

giv

en a

co

py

of

po

st-m

ort

em r

epo

rt o

f R

ud

dar

.

Po

lice

has

file

d c

ase

un

der

C

ow

Pro

tect

ion

Act

of

UP

ag

ain

st f

rien

ds

of

Ru

dd

ar w

ho

su

rviv

ed t

he

inci

den

t. T

hey

w

ere

arre

sted

, an

d a

re c

ur-

ren

tly

rele

ased

on

bai

l w

hil

e th

e ca

se i

s o

n t

rial

in

Mat

hu

ra

dis

tric

t co

urt

.


S.N

V

icti

m,

Inci

de

nt

Po

lice

ve

rsio

n o

f th

e i

nci

de

nt

Fa

mil

y’s

te

stim

on

y

Le

ga

l p

roce

ed

-in

gs

5.

Zah

id s

/o A

saru

d-

din

an

d M

ariy

am

and

Qar

ar (

19 y

ears

o

ld)

s/o

Nia

mat

r/o

vil

lag

e D

hu

la-

wat

, b

lock

Tao

ru,

dis

tric

t N

uh

, H

ar-

yan

a

May

31,

20

15 a

t 2

am

Nea

r B

anip

ur

Ch

ow

k,

NH

8

Qar

ar w

as u

nm

ar-

ried

. Q

arar

liv

ed

wit

h h

is a

un

t (B

ua)

in

Bad

akal

i an

d

wo

rked

as

a d

rive

r ca

rryi

ng

veg

etab

les

in a

pic

ku

p v

ehic

le.

Zah

id w

as m

arri

ed

and

had

tw

o c

hil

-d

ren

ag

ed 5

an

d 4

ye

ars

old

.

As

per

th

e M

agis

teri

al E

nq

uir

y, s

ub

mit

-te

d o

n 2

nd

Feb

20

16,

foll

ow

ing

is

wh

at

hap

pen

ed i

n t

he

inci

den

t:

On

th

e n

igh

t o

f 30

/31

May

20

15,

in a

p

ick

up

veh

icle

no

. R

J-0

5-G

A-9

781

tota

l se

ven

per

son

s n

amel

y, Q

arar

s/o

Ni-

yam

at, Z

ahid

ali

as P

agla

s/o

Nas

rud

din

, L

eela

ali

as J

un

aid

s/o

Jam

eel,

Fem

u s

/o

Zaf

ru,

Tar

eef

s/o

Has

an M

d.,

Irf

an s

/o

Ayu

b K

han

(al

l 6

of

them

res

iden

ts o

f vi

ll.

Dh

ula

wat

); a

nd

Sah

in s

/o A

sru

dd

din

r/

o F

akar

pu

r K

ho

ri (

Teh

sil

Nag

ina)

wer

e p

rese

nt

on

hig

hw

ay f

rom

Bh

iwad

i to

D

elh

i-Ja

ipu

r n

atio

nal

hig

hw

ay w

ith

th

e in

ten

tio

n o

f lo

ot.

Th

ey h

ad c

ou

ntr

y m

ade

pis

tols

an

d a

co

un

try

mad

e g

un

, w

hic

h p

oli

ce c

oll

ecte

d f

rom

th

e b

ack

sid

e o

f th

e p

ick

up

veh

icle

. P

oli

ce h

ad A

K4

8

rifl

es.

FS

L r

epo

rt s

tate

s th

at a

ll w

eap

on

s w

ere

in w

ork

ing

co

nd

itio

ns,

an

d b

ull

ets

wer

e fi

red

fro

m a

ll.

Th

ree

of

them

wer

e si

ttin

g a

t th

e fr

on

t,

and

fo

ur

at t

he

bac

ksi

de.

Qar

ar w

as d

riv-

ing

, an

d L

eela

an

d Z

ahid

wer

e si

ttin

g

alo

ng

wit

h h

im o

n c

on

du

cto

r si

de.

Po

-li

ce v

ehic

le w

as f

oll

ow

ing

th

eir

veh

icle

. P

oli

ce i

nd

icat

ed t

o t

hem

to

sto

p,

bu

t th

ey d

idn

’t.

Lat

er t

hey

to

ok

a u

-tu

rn a

nd

h

it t

he

po

lice

veh

icle

. F

irea

rms

wer

e ex

-ch

ang

ed.

Qar

ar w

as h

it,

and

he

die

d.

Res

t 6

of

them

, tr

ied

to

ru

n a

way

. S

ahin

w

as h

it b

y fi

rear

ms

on

his

lo

wer

bac

k.

He,

an

d I

rfan

wer

e ca

ug

ht

by

po

lice

. R

est

3 w

ere

succ

essf

ul

in e

scap

ing

. T

her

e w

ere

bu

llet

mar

ks

on

th

e p

oli

ce v

ehic

le,

on

th

e fr

on

t m

irro

r o

f ri

gh

t si

de.

Qar

ar

and

Sah

in w

ere

tak

en t

o h

osp

ital

. S

ahin

w

as l

ater

sh

ifte

d t

o P

GI

Ro

hta

k.

As

per

th

e fa

mil

y, b

efo

re B

anip

ur

Ch

ow

k o

n N

H8

, u

nd

er t

he

juri

sdic

tio

n o

f K

asau

la

po

lice

sta

tio

n, th

eir

veh

icle

was

fire

d u

po

n a

nd

sto

pp

ed b

y th

e p

oli

ce.

Jun

aid

so

me-

ho

w j

um

ped

ou

t o

f th

e ve

hic

le a

nd

esc

aped

. Q

arar

an

d S

ahin

wer

e w

ou

nd

ed b

y th

e p

oli

ce fi

rin

g. Z

ahid

’s d

ead

bo

dy

was

fo

un

d a

t a

dis

tan

ce o

f so

me

200

m i

n t

he

bu

shes

of

the

road

go

ing

to

war

ds

Ban

ipu

r vi

llag

e 4

day

s af

ter

this

in

cid

ent.

No

po

lice

man

was

in

jure

d a

lth

ou

gh

as

per

po

lice

sto

ry,

the

'cri

min

als’

in

th

e ve

hic

le h

ad fi

red

up

on

th

e p

oli

ce.

A r

epre

sen

tati

on

file

d o

n b

ehal

f o

f th

e fa

mil

ies

of

the

dec

ease

d r

aise

s q

ues

tio

ns

on

th

e p

oli

ce s

tory

bas

ed o

n t

he

foll

ow

ing

po

ints

:

Mag

iste

rial

en

qu

iry

did

no

t ta

ke

into

co

nsi

der

atio

n t

he

evid

ence

wh

ich

pro

ve t

he

inci

-d

ent

as a

cas

e o

f fa

ke

enco

un

ter.

Th

e st

atem

ents

of

the

surv

ivo

rs o

f th

e in

cid

ent

i.e.

Ir

fan

an

d S

ahin

wer

e n

ot

reco

rded

in

in

dep

end

ent

and

un

inti

mid

atin

g c

on

dit

ion

s.

As

per

sta

tem

ents

giv

en t

o t

he

Mag

iste

rial

en

qu

iry,

in

jure

d Q

arar

an

d S

ahin

wer

e se

nt

to h

osp

ital

in

an

am

bu

lan

ce u

nac

com

pan

ied

by

any

po

lice

man

. If

Qar

ar a

nd

Sa-

hin

wer

e so

cal

led

“cr

imin

als”

, th

en w

hy

no

po

lice

man

gu

ard

ed t

he

amb

ula

nce

. A

nd

if

Sah

in w

as a

cri

min

al t

hen

wh

y d

idn

't h

e tr

y to

esc

ape

in t

he

ho

spit

al s

ince

he

had

th

e o

pp

ort

un

ity.

Po

lice

cla

ims

that

a w

eap

on

was

rec

ove

red

fro

m S

ahin

, b

ut

the

reco

very

mem

o h

as n

o

sig

nat

ure

of

Sah

in.

Po

st m

ort

em r

epo

rt o

f Z

ahid

dat

ed 4

Ju

ne

2015

in

dic

ates

his

dat

e o

f d

eath

on

3 J

un

e 20

15.

Th

ou

gh

ep

ort

rec

ord

s va

rio

us

inju

ries

an

d w

orm

in

fect

ed b

od

y, b

ut

in c

on

clu

-si

on

it

wri

tes

that

cau

se o

f d

eath

can

no

t b

e m

ade

un

til

they

rec

eive

rep

ort

fro

m c

hem

-ic

al e

xam

inat

ion

, sc

ene

of

crim

e an

d p

ho

tog

rap

hs.

Zah

id’s

par

ents

say

th

at h

is b

od

y w

as b

eyo

nd

rec

og

nit

ion

, th

ey c

ou

ld r

eco

gn

ise

the

bo

dy

bec

ause

of

an o

ld m

ark

on

his

leg

an

d a

rin

g i

n h

and

.

It i

s as

sum

ed t

hat

po

lice

du

rin

g i

nve

stig

atio

n w

ou

ld h

ave

th

oro

ug

hly

sea

rch

ed t

he

area

s ar

ou

nd

th

e in

cid

ent.

Eve

n t

hen

, h

ow

is

it t

hat

Zah

id’s

bo

dy

was

fo

un

d m

erel

y 20

0 m

fro

m t

he

pla

ce o

f in

cid

ent

fou

r d

ays

late

r. T

he

tort

ure

mar

ks

on

Zah

id’s

bo

dy

ind

icat

e th

at h

e w

as p

erh

aps

tort

ure

d t

ill

dea

th i

n p

oli

ce c

ust

od

y p

ost

th

e in

cid

ent.

Po

st m

ort

em o

f Q

arar

was

co

nd

uct

ed i

n R

ewar

i o

n 3

1 M

ay 2

015

; re

po

rt c

on

clu

des

th

at

he

die

d d

ue

to e

xces

sive

ble

edin

g r

esu

ltin

g f

rom

‘Fir

earm

in

jury

’ in

ab

do

men

; d

ead

b

od

y o

f Q

arar

an

d i

nju

red

Sah

in s

/o A

shru

dd

in w

ere

bro

ug

ht

to t

he

ho

spit

al,

wit

h n

o

po

lice

per

son

nel

in

co

mp

any.

…..

Kas

aula

PS

, d

is-

tric

t R

ewar

i,

Har

yan

a fi

led

F

IR a

gai

nst

Za-

hid

, Q

arar

an

d

oth

ers

in t

he

FIR

N

o.

161/

2015

on

31

st M

ay 2

015

u

nd

er s

ecti

on

14

8,

149

, 33

2, 3

53,

186

, 30

7 o

f IP

C,

25,

54 a

nd

59

of

Arm

s A

ct a

nd

3

of

Pre

ven

tio

n o

f D

amag

e to

Pu

b-

lic

Pro

per

ty A

ct

198

4.

Tw

o o

f th

e ac

-cu

sed

wer

e co

n-

vict

ed,

wh

ile

on

e w

as a

cqu

itte

d.

Fam

ily

is p

rep

ar-

ing

to

file

a c

ase

in R

ewar

i d

is-

tric

t u

sin

g 1

6th

p

oin

t o

f th

e g

uid

elin

es l

aid

d

ow

n b

y th

e S

u-

pre

me

Co

urt

in

P

UC

L V

S S

tate

o

f M

ahar

ash

tra

[(20

14)

10 S

CC

6

35].

79


80

S.N

o.

Vic

tim

, In

cid

en

t P

oli

ce v

ers

ion

of

the

in

cid

en

t F

am

ily

’s t

est

imo

ny

L

eg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

6.

Ari

f K

han

, ag

ed 2

2 ye

ars

old

s/o

Ali

mu

dd

in

r/o

Nau

gao

n,

dis

tric

t A

lwar

, R

ajas

than

20.1

0.2

014

in f

ron

t o

f h

is h

ou

se i

n

Nau

gao

n,

dis

tric

t A

l-w

ar,

Raj

asth

an

Ari

f w

as s

oo

n g

oin

g t

o

be

mar

ried

. H

e w

as

stu

dyi

ng

B.C

om

(fi

nal

ye

ar)

at R

R C

oll

ege,

A

lwar

. H

e w

as a

t h

om

e fo

r a

vaca

tio

n.

Po

lice

sto

ry s

ays

that

on

e T

ahir

fr

om

th

e sa

me

vill

age

call

ed p

oli

ce-

man

Aja

y sa

yin

g t

hat

a s

usp

icio

us

Bo

lero

is

tak

ing

ro

un

ds

at t

he

hig

hw

ay.

An

d,

hen

ce t

he

po

lice

-m

en s

tart

ed f

oll

ow

ing

Ari

f’s

veh

i-cl

e.

On

th

e n

igh

t o

f th

e en

cou

nte

r, A

rif

was

ret

urn

ing

fro

m t

hei

r g

ro-

cery

sh

op

at

Bh

op

ali

cho

wk

in

Tap

uk

ra,

Alw

ar.

It i

s at

a d

ista

nce

of

3 k

ms

fro

m t

hei

r h

ou

se.

Ari

f’s

you

ng

er b

roth

er u

sual

ly r

un

s th

e sh

op

. B

ut

this

nig

ht,

Ari

f w

as a

lon

e in

th

e sh

op

. H

e re

turn

ed h

om

e in

th

eir

Bo

lero

car

(#

RJ-

2-U

P-2

627

). A

po

lice

jee

p w

as f

oll

ow

ing

his

car

fr

om

th

e h

igh

way

, an

d k

ept

on

fo

llo

win

g t

ill

he

par

ked

th

e ca

r in

fr

on

t o

f th

eir

ho

use

. A

s so

on

as

Ari

f st

op

ped

, h

e w

as s

till

sea

ted

in

-si

de

and

car

en

gin

e w

as o

n,

po

lice

men

cam

e o

ut

of

thei

r ca

r an

d

sho

t h

im.

Po

lice

veh

icle

sto

pp

ed a

t a

dis

tan

ce o

f 2

feet

.

Po

lice

man

Kai

lash

, S

edu

Ram

(h

ead

co

nst

able

), A

jay

Kr.

(d

rive

r)

and

Ram

Pra

tap

. K

aila

sh a

nd

Ram

Pra

tap

wer

e ca

rryi

ng

AK

47,

w

hil

e S

edu

Ram

had

a p

isto

l.

Th

e en

gin

es a

nd

lig

hts

of

bo

th t

he

veh

icle

s w

ere

stil

l o

n w

hil

e th

ey

sho

t h

im a

nd

ver

y so

on

fled

fro

m t

he

spo

t. A

rif

pas

sed

aw

ay o

n t

he

spo

t. H

e re

ceiv

ed t

hre

e b

ull

ets

inju

ries

. O

ne

of

the

bu

llet

s h

it S

edu

R

am a

s w

ell.

His

bo

dy

was

tak

en t

o a

ho

spit

al i

n G

uru

gra

m.

Bu

t it

was

giv

en b

ack

at

4am

aft

er f

aile

d a

ttem

pts

of

revi

vin

g h

im.

Lat

er i

n t

he

mo

rnin

g,

po

st m

ort

em w

as c

on

du

cted

at

Tap

uk

ra g

ove

rnm

ent

ho

spit

al. In

th

e h

osp

ital

, fa

mil

y re

cog

nis

ed t

he

po

lice

men

, w

ho

had

co

me

to g

et

Sed

u R

am t

reat

ed.

Fam

ily

con

fro

nte

d t

hem

, an

d e

ven

cli

cked

th

eir

ph

oto

s fo

r re

cord

.

FIR

was

file

d,

afte

r p

rote

sts

fro

m t

he

fam

ily

and

pu

bli

c. F

amil

y h

as

PM

rep

ort

co

py.

Fam

ily

also

met

CM

Raj

e. A

ccu

sed

Kai

lash

was

ar-

rest

ed a

fter

a w

eek

on

27t

h O

cto

ber

. H

e co

nfe

ssed

, b

ut

also

sta

ted

th

at h

e w

as n

ot

awar

e th

at t

he

gu

n w

as l

oad

ed,

and

th

at t

hey

hav

e re

ceiv

ed o

nly

3 d

ays

trai

nin

g t

o h

and

le a

gu

n l

ike

AK

47.

Th

e o

ther

th

ree

accu

sed

po

lice

men

als

o s

tate

d t

hat

Kai

lash

fire

d a

t A

rif.

Init

iall

y, p

oli

ce fi

led

an

FIR

u

nd

er s

ecti

on

30

7 o

f IP

C

agai

nst

th

e fo

ur

po

lice

men

ev

en t

ho

ug

h A

rif

had

die

d i

n

the

inci

den

t.

Th

e ch

arg

esh

eet

of

CB

-CID

fr

amed

on

ly o

ne

of

the

fou

r p

oli

cem

en u

nd

er s

ecti

on

s 30

2, 3

07

and

427

of

Ind

ian

P

enal

Co

de.

Th

e ca

se w

as t

ran

sfer

red

to

C

BI

on

req

ues

t o

f th

e fa

mil

y.

Bu

t C

BI’

s ro

le i

n t

he

inve

sti-

gat

ion

has

bee

n w

ors

e. T

hey

fr

amed

th

e p

oli

cem

an u

nd

er

sect

ion

30

4 (

neg

lig

ence

) o

f IP

C,

inst

ead

of

fram

ing

all

fo

ur

po

lice

men

un

der

sec

tio

n

302

of

IPC

.

Fam

ily

has

file

d a

n a

pp

eal

agai

nst

th

e ch

arg

esh

eet

of

CB

I in

Raj

asth

an H

igh

Co

urt

.

Acc

use

d K

aila

sh fi

led

fo

r b

ail

thri

ce i

n l

ow

er c

ou

rt a

nd

tw

ice

in h

igh

co

urt

. H

e w

as

giv

en b

ail

wh

en C

BI

file

d t

he

char

ges

hee

t w

ith

IP

C s

.30

4A

. T

he

accu

sed

po

lice

man

is

ou

t o

n b

ail

curr

entl

y, w

hil

e th

e o

ther

th

ree

wer

e n

ever

arr

est-

ed.

81


S.N

o.

Vic

tim

, In

cid

en

t P

oli

ce v

ers

ion

of

the

in

cid

en

t F

am

ily

’s t

est

imo

ny

L

eg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

7.

Far

id s

/o S

hri

Lal

lu a

lias

Ch

ee-

ma

r/o

Ru

nd

h V

illa

ge,

PS

K

ho

h, D

istr

ict

Bh

arat

pu

r, R

a-ja

sth

an

30 D

ec 2

013

, n

ear

vill

age

Gu

-la

lta,

dis

tric

t N

uh

, H

arya

na

As

per

po

lice

FIR

: In

form

atio

n r

e-ce

ived

at

4am

fro

m s

ecre

t so

urc

es

that

6-7

cri

min

als

wit

h w

eap

on

s ar

e tr

avel

ing

in

a B

ole

ro.

Th

ey h

ad

sto

len

a t

ract

or

and

a t

roll

ey a

nd

th

e B

ole

ro.

We

inte

rcep

ted

th

e B

ole

ro n

ear

Gu

lalt

a vi

llag

e. B

ole

ro

did

no

t st

op

wh

en i

nd

icat

ed s

o b

y u

s an

d i

nst

ead

th

e cr

imin

als

fire

d

up

on

po

lice

. P

oli

ce a

lso

fire

d i

n s

elf

def

ense

an

d a

s a

resu

lt a

ll c

rim

i-n

als

sto

pp

ed t

he

Bo

lero

an

d e

s-ca

ped

in

th

e fa

rm,

exce

pt

for

on

e w

ho

was

fo

un

d i

nju

red

an

d u

nco

n-

scio

us

in t

he

Bo

lero

.

On

29

Mar

ch 2

013

, F

arid

, o

n a

bik

e n

o.

RJ

05-S

F-6

427

, w

as

visi

tin

g r

elat

ives

in

vil

lag

e S

ing

alh

edi,

PS

Pu

nh

ana,

Dis

tric

t M

ewat

, H

arya

na.

He

met

Ham

id,

alo

ng

wit

h H

amid

's s

on

R

ahu

l an

d t

wo

oth

er p

erso

ns,

at

10p

m n

igh

t at

Bu

s st

atio

n

Sin

gal

hed

i. S

ud

den

ly,

a p

oli

ce v

ehic

le a

rriv

ed a

nd

6-7

po

-li

cem

en f

orc

efu

lly

pu

lled

Far

id i

nto

th

e ve

hic

le a

nd

wen

t aw

ay.

Ham

id t

ried

a l

ot

to g

et F

arid

fre

ed o

f p

oli

ce a

bd

uc-

tio

n, b

ut

po

lice

men

did

no

t st

op

an

d s

aid

th

ey a

re t

akin

g

him

fo

r in

terr

og

atio

n. F

arid

's b

ike

rem

ain

ed a

t S

ing

alh

edi

Bu

s S

tati

on

. O

n 3

0 D

ecem

ber

20

13 a

rou

nd

7.3

0 a

m,

Ayy

ub

rec

'd a

ph

on

e ca

ll f

rom

Zah

eer

Kh

an t

hat

po

lice

has

cal

led

fro

m M

an-

dik

hed

a H

osp

ital

an

d s

aid

th

at F

arid

has

a b

ull

et i

nju

ry a

nd

h

e n

eed

s b

loo

d.

Wh

en i

n s

om

etim

e A

yyu

b r

each

ed t

he

ho

s-p

ital

wit

h h

is f

amil

y m

emb

ers,

he

saw

th

ere

is l

ot

of

po

lice

. In

th

e h

osp

ital

he

fou

nd

Far

id i

s d

ead

an

d i

den

tifi

ed h

is

bo

dy.

Ayy

ub

was

th

reat

ened

by

the

po

lice

an

d f

orc

ed t

o

sig

n b

lan

k p

aper

s. T

hey

sai

d o

ther

wis

e th

ey w

ill

no

t g

ive

his

b

od

y to

th

e fa

mil

y, w

ill

bu

rn t

he

bo

dy

as u

nid

enti

fied

an

d

wil

l fu

rth

er i

mp

lica

te f

amil

y m

emb

ers

in f

alse

cas

es.

Fam

ily

reac

hed

bac

k t

o t

hei

r vi

llag

e ar

ou

nd

9.3

0p

m a

t n

igh

t af

ter

po

stm

ort

em o

f th

e b

od

y. B

od

y w

as b

uri

ed i

n t

he

vill

age

then

. N

ext

day

, A

yyu

b, H

amid

an

d o

ther

s m

et S

HO

of

Pu

nh

ana

PS

.

FIR

No

. 56

3 d

ated

31

Dec

em-

ber

20

13 u

/s 3

07,

332

, 35

3, 1

86

IP

C a

nd

25/

54/5

9 A

rms

Act

at

PS

Pu

nh

ana

94

3/13

on

30

.12.

13 a

t P

S N

uh

u

/s 3

80

IP

C b

y F

azru

ag

ain

st

un

kn

ow

n a

lleg

ing

th

eft

of

his

tr

acto

r b

etw

een

1-2

am

.

A p

etit

ion

was

file

d b

y th

e fa

mil

y in

Fir

st C

lass

Co

urt

, F

iro

zpu

r Z

irk

a, D

istr

ict

Nu

h

seek

ing

reg

istr

atio

n o

f co

m-

pla

int

agai

nst

P

rah

lad

Sin

gh

, S

I, I

nch

arg

e S

pec

ial

Po

lice

Sta

ff,

Dis

tric

t M

ewat

, J

aan

Md

. E

.A.S

.I.,

Y

ash

pal

Hav

ald

ar,

Su

be

Sin

gh

S

ipah

i, R

akes

h S

ipah

i, M

a-h

esh

Sip

ahi,

Raj

pal

E.A

.S.I

. S

pec

ial

Po

lice

Sta

ff,

Pu

nh

ana,

D

istr

ict

Mew

at u

nd

er s

ec-

tio

ns

302

and

120

of

Ind

ian

P

enal

Co

de.

Th

is p

etit

ion

was

d

ism

isse

d b

y th

e p

oli

ce.


82

S.N

o.

Vic

tim

, In

cid

en

t P

oli

ce v

ers

ion

of

the

in

cid

en

t F

am

ily

’s t

est

imo

ny

L

eg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

8.

Jasm

aal,

ag

e 31

yea

rs o

ld

r/o

Gu

rak

sar,

Hat

hin

, P

alw

al

5th

Sep

20

11,

nea

r h

is v

illa

ge.

He

was

mar

ried

an

d h

ave

5 ch

ild

ren

. H

e w

as a

far

m l

a-b

ou

rer

by

pro

fess

ion

. Ja

smaa

l h

ad n

o c

rim

inal

cas

e in

pas

t.

No

t k

no

wn

A

s p

er t

he

fam

ily,

Jas

maa

l w

as i

nvo

lved

wit

h a

lo

cal

gan

g

for

pas

t fe

w d

ays

wh

en o

n 5

th S

epte

mb

er 2

011

, th

e g

ang

’s

veh

icle

was

fire

d u

po

n b

y p

oli

ce a

t n

igh

t. J

asm

aal

wh

o w

as

sitt

ing

at

the

bac

k s

ide

of

the

veh

icle

(T

ata

40

7 te

mp

o),

was

h

it b

y b

ull

et f

rom

beh

ind

. T

he

gan

g m

emb

ers

esca

ped

an

d

by

earl

y m

orn

ing

dro

pp

ed i

nju

red

Jas

maa

l o

ne

end

of

the

vill

age.

Jas

maa

l w

as s

till

bre

ath

ing

wh

en h

e w

as d

isco

vere

d

by

the

vill

ager

s. F

amil

y sa

ys t

hat

he

him

self

nar

rate

d t

he

inci

den

t b

efo

re h

e d

ied

.

Vil

lag

e le

ader

s/P

anch

as d

ecid

ed n

ot

to p

urs

ue

this

cas

e si

nce

a g

ang

was

in

volv

ed.

Th

ere

is n

o F

IR o

r m

edic

al r

ec-

ord

of

Jasm

aal’s

dea

th.

No

leg

al p

roce

edin

gs

wer

e in

itia

ted

by

the

fam

ily.

Leg

al p

roce

edin

gs

by

po

lice

o

n t

he

surv

ivo

rs o

f th

e in

ci-

den

t ar

e n

ot

kn

ow

n.


S.N

o.

Vic

tim

, In

cid

en

t P

oli

ce v

ers

ion

of

the

in

cid

en

t F

am

ily

’s t

est

imo

ny

L

eg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

9.

Ajm

at s

/o (

late

) S

aad

iq

r/o

vil

lag

e M

amli

ka,

dis

tric

t N

uh

, H

arya

na

Nas

eem

s/o

Lia

qat

ali

as B

arb

a-ri

r/o

vil

lag

e S

ing

ar,

blo

ck P

un

-h

ana,

dis

tric

t N

uh

, H

arya

na.

17 M

ay 2

011

at

aro

un

d 2

:30

am

Nea

r K

otv

an c

hec

k p

ost

nea

r K

osi

Bo

rder

; in

Pai

nth

ka,

Ko

si,

nea

r G

yan

dee

p S

cho

ol,

G

ova

rdh

an c

ho

wk

; D

istr

ict

Mat

hu

ra,

Utt

ar P

rad

esh

Ajm

at w

as m

arri

ed a

nd

had

4

chil

dre

n.

Nas

eem

was

als

o

mar

ried

, h

ad n

o c

hil

dre

n.

Bo

th o

f th

em w

ere

dri

vers

by

pro

fess

ion

.

As

per

a n

ewsp

aper

rep

ort

, an

8-

mem

ber

gan

g t

rave

lin

g i

n a

n I

nn

o-

va c

ar l

oo

ted

at

seve

ral

pla

ces,

an

d

also

cap

ture

d c

ivil

ian

s as

ho

stag

e.

A f

arm

wo

rker

ale

rted

th

e p

oli

ce.

Th

e g

ang

lo

ote

d a

can

ter

(bel

on

gin

g t

o d

rive

r O

mve

er a

nd

a

clea

ner

Mah

end

ra)

nea

r G

yan

dee

p

Sch

oo

l n

ear

Go

vard

han

ch

ow

k a

nd

ro

bb

ed a

du

mfe

r o

n B

har

atp

ur

road

. P

oli

ce i

nte

rcep

ted

th

e g

ang

in

th

is a

rea

(nea

r K

otv

an c

hec

k

po

st)

at 2

.30

am a

nd

fire

d u

po

n

them

wh

en t

hey

wer

e tr

yin

g t

o

esca

pe.

Po

lice

men

Ris

hip

al S

ing

h,

SI

Jayp

al s

ing

h,

Jayp

al,

Co

nst

able

M

ayar

am,

Om

kar

sin

gh

of

Ko

si

than

a an

d B

P S

ing

h (

of

Bar

san

a th

ana)

wer

e in

volv

ed i

n t

he

en-

cou

nte

r. T

wo

of

the

gan

g m

emb

ers

wer

e in

jure

d a

nd

cap

ture

d b

y p

o-

lice

, w

hil

e o

ther

s es

cap

ed.

On

e w

as

iden

tifi

ed a

s N

asee

m s

/o L

iaq

at o

f vi

llag

e S

ing

ar,

wh

ile

oth

er w

as n

ot

iden

tifi

ed.

Nas

eem

an

d A

jmat

wer

e tr

avel

ing

in

a t

ruck

wh

en t

hey

w

ere

fire

d u

po

n b

y p

oli

ce a

s so

on

as

they

rea

ched

Ko

si b

or-

der

. F

amil

y sa

ys A

jmat

an

d N

asee

m w

ere

retu

rnin

g h

om

e,

in t

ime

to a

tten

d N

asee

m’s

sis

ter’

s m

arri

age.

On

17t

h M

ay 2

011

, fa

mil

y g

ot

to k

no

w t

hro

ug

h m

edia

new

s th

at N

asee

m a

nd

Ajm

at h

ave

bee

n k

ille

d i

n a

n e

nco

un

ter.

Des

pit

e se

vera

l eff

ort

s o

f th

e fa

mil

y, P

oli

ce d

idn

’t h

and

ove

r th

e b

od

y to

th

e fa

mil

y. F

amil

y w

as o

nly

all

ow

ed t

o s

ee t

he

bo

dy.

Nas

eem

’s b

od

y h

ad b

ull

et i

nju

ries

on

hea

d,

sho

uld

er,

wai

st a

nd

up

per

th

igh

are

a. O

n 1

9th

May

20

11,

Po

lice

fo

rced

th

e fa

mil

y to

bu

ry N

asee

m’s

bo

dy

at a

bu

rial

gro

un

d i

n K

ar-

bal

a, A

ura

ng

abad

, M

ath

ura

(n

ear

rad

io s

tati

on

). P

oli

ce r

e-m

ain

ed p

rese

nt

du

rin

g t

he

bu

rial

an

d i

n f

act,

fo

r n

ext

six

mo

nth

s p

oli

ce k

ept

the

bu

rial

gro

un

d u

nd

er s

urv

eill

ance

by

sett

ing

up

a t

emp

ora

ry c

ho

wk

i. W

hen

fam

ily

enq

uir

ed

abo

ut

the

inci

den

t fr

om

th

e p

eop

le w

ho

wo

rked

in

th

e sh

op

s w

her

e p

oli

ce fi

red

, a

ho

tel

per

son

to

ld t

he

fam

ily

that

N

asee

m a

nd

Ajm

at w

ere

sto

pp

ed b

y p

oli

ce,

enq

uir

ed b

y th

em a

nd

wer

e th

en t

old

to

go

. B

ut

as t

hey

wer

e le

avin

g,

they

wer

e sh

ot

seve

ral

tim

es,

and

kil

led

bru

tall

y. T

hey

in

-fo

rmed

th

e fa

mil

y th

at A

jmat

an

d N

asee

m d

ied

on

th

e sp

ot.

P

oli

ce fi

red

ou

t o

f su

spic

ion

th

at t

hei

r ve

hic

le w

as a

sto

len

ve

hic

le.

Ho

wev

er,

po

lice

co

uld

no

t p

rove

th

at i

t w

as a

sto

-le

n v

ehic

le.

Th

e ve

hic

le b

elo

ng

ed t

o t

he

per

son

fo

r w

ho

m

Ajm

at w

ork

ed a

s a

dri

ver.

On

th

e o

ther

han

d,

Ajm

at’s

fam

ily

was

in

form

ed o

nly

th

ree

day

s af

ter

the

enco

un

ter

wh

en p

oli

ce c

alle

d a

t P

S P

un

han

a,

wh

o i

n t

urn

in

form

ed A

mee

n (

a re

lati

ve o

f A

jmat

). B

y th

e ti

me

fam

ily

cou

ld r

each

Mat

hu

ra,

Ajm

at’s

bo

dy

was

alr

ead

y b

uri

ed b

y p

oli

ce.

Fam

ily

says

th

at t

he

Mat

hu

ra p

oli

ce a

fter

5-6

mo

nth

s vi

sit-

ed t

hei

r re

lati

ve t

o m

ake

enq

uir

ies

abo

ut

the

bac

kg

rou

nd

of

Nas

eem

an

d h

is c

rim

inal

rec

ord

. P

oli

ce a

lso

en

qu

ired

ab

ou

t A

jmat

’s b

ack

gro

un

d p

ost

en

cou

nte

r, b

ut

did

no

t fi

nd

an

y-th

ing

ag

ain

st h

im.

Nas

eem

’s f

ath

er w

rote

a l

ette

r to

NH

RC

req

ues

tin

g t

hei

r in

terv

enti

on

to

see

k t

he

bo

dy

of

Nas

eem

so

th

at f

amil

y co

uld

per

form

las

t ri

tes.

Ko

si P

oli

ce r

egis

tere

d F

IR N

o.

331/

10 d

ated

17

Jun

e 20

17

agai

nst

Ajm

at a

nd

Nas

eem

u

nd

er s

ecti

on

30

7 o

f IP

C.

Ajm

at a

nd

Nas

eem

’s f

amil

ies

rece

ived

co

mp

ensa

tio

n f

rom

N

HR

C.

Bu

t n

o f

orm

al c

ase

was

reg

iste

red

ag

ain

st t

he

gu

ilty

po

lice

men

.

83


84

S.N

o.

Vic

tim

, In

cid

en

t P

oli

ce v

ers

ion

of

the

in

cid

en

t F

am

ily

’s t

est

imo

ny

L

eg

al

pro

cee

din

gs

10.

Sal

im,

age

28 y

ears

old

r/o

vil

lag

e S

ahsa

n,

dis

tric

t B

har

atp

ur,

Raj

asth

an

15 M

ay 2

010

, in

Mat

hu

ra u

nd

er

juri

sdic

tio

n o

f F

arah

po

lice

st

atio

n.

He

was

mar

ried

an

d h

ave

fou

r ch

ild

ren

. H

e w

as a

mec

han

ic

by

pro

fess

ion

.

No

t k

no

wn

. P

ost

an

acc

iden

t in

th

e ye

ar 2

00

9,

Sal

im s

ust

ain

ed h

ead

in

juri

es s

ub

seq

uen

tly

lead

ing

to

par

alys

is.

Ear

lier

, h

e w

as

bei

ng

tre

ated

in

Jai

pu

r, l

ater

he

star

ted

tre

atm

ent

in M

ath

u-

ra.

On

15

May

20

10,

wh

ile

he

was

vis

itin

g M

ath

ura

wit

h h

is

two

rel

ativ

es.

As

per

a m

edia

rep

ort

, F

arah

po

lice

in

terc

ept-

ed t

hem

bec

ause

th

ey c

ou

ld n

ot

sho

w a

dri

vin

g l

icen

ce a

nd

la

ter

too

k S

alim

in

cu

sto

dy.

Th

e re

lati

ves

wer

e fo

rced

to

go

h

om

e an

d t

old

to

get

Sal

im r

elea

sed

wh

en t

hey

co

me

bac

k

wit

h t

hei

r li

cen

ce.

Nex

t d

ay,

fam

ily

read

in

th

e n

ews

that

Sal

im h

as b

een

kil

led

in

an

en

cou

nte

r. S

alim

had

3-4

bu

llet

wo

un

ds

in h

is b

od

y in

clu

din

g i

n h

ead

an

d c

hes

t. P

oli

ce r

efu

sed

to

giv

e th

e b

od

y o

r th

e d

ocu

men

ts t

o t

he

fam

ily.

Po

lice

to

ld t

hem

to

bu

ry

the

bo

dy

ther

e it

self

an

d t

hat

th

ey c

an’t

tak

e it

to

th

eir

vil-

lag

e. P

oli

ce b

uri

ed t

he

bo

dy

at K

arb

ala

sam

e n

igh

t w

ith

ou

t th

e p

rese

nce

of

fam

ily.

Wh

en f

amil

y vi

site

d t

his

pla

ce t

he

nex

t d

ay,

po

lice

was

alr

ead

y p

rese

nt.

Th

ey t

hre

aten

ed t

he

fam

ily

wit

h a

rres

ts i

f th

ey w

ere

no

t le

avin

g t

he

site

im

med

i-at

ely.

As

per

th

e m

edia

rep

ort

s, f

amil

y p

lead

ed t

o t

he

Su

-p

rem

e C

ou

rt t

o r

estr

ain

th

e p

oli

ce f

rom

dis

po

sin

g o

f S

alim

’s

bo

dy.

No

t k

no

wn

.


11.

Jah

ul

s/o

(la

te)

Ph

attu

an

d

Ch

hu

tni

r/o

vil

lag

e A

ali,

Hat

hin

blo

ck,

dis

tric

t P

alw

al,

Har

yan

a.

17.0

3.20

10

nea

r fo

rest

s o

f T

ehra

vil

lag

e,

Vri

nd

avan

, M

ath

ura

Dis

tric

t,

Utt

ar P

rad

esh

He

was

mar

ried

hav

e tw

o c

hil

-d

ren

ag

ed 1

3 an

d 9

yea

rs o

ld.

He

wo

rked

as

a d

rive

r at

a

con

stru

ctio

n s

ite

in C

hh

atti

s-g

arh

.

As

per

med

ia s

tori

es,

po

lice

en

-co

un

tere

d J

ahu

l af

ter

he

loo

ted

a

jew

elry

sh

ow

roo

m i

n M

ath

ura

. H

is

oth

er ‘g

ang

’ mem

ber

s es

cap

ed t

he

enco

un

ter.

Jah

ul

was

sai

d t

o h

ave

bee

n i

nvo

lved

in

th

efts

an

d h

e h

ad

a re

war

d o

f R

s. 5

0,0

00

on

him

.

Po

lice

sto

ry i

s th

at J

ahu

l an

d o

th-

ers

loo

ted

a j

ewel

ry s

ho

wro

om

in

M

ath

ura

. Ja

hu

l w

as t

ack

led

an

d

enco

un

tere

d b

y p

oli

ce,

wh

ile

oth

er

mem

ber

s o

f h

is g

ang

are

ab

sco

nd

-in

g.

Acc

ord

ing

to

th

e F

IR w

hen

th

e p

oli

ce w

ere

foll

ow

ing

th

e g

ang

wh

o

wer

e in

th

eir

veh

icle

, th

ey s

tart

ed

firi

ng

on

th

em w

ith

th

e in

ten

tio

n

to k

ill

them

. O

ne

of

the

bu

llet

s fi

red

hit

a p

oli

cem

an i

n h

is b

ull

et

pro

of

jack

et.

Th

e p

oli

ce w

hil

e p

ut-

tin

g t

hei

r li

ves

in d

ang

er a

lso

sta

rt-

ed fi

rin

g a

t th

em a

s a

mea

ns

of

self

-def

ence

. T

her

e w

as a

lso

a c

oll

isio

n

bet

wee

n t

he

two

veh

icle

s an

d 1

ve

hic

le (

Bo

lero

) fe

ll i

nto

a d

itch

. T

he

gan

g s

tep

ped

ou

t o

f th

e ca

r an

d s

tart

ed fi

rin

g a

t th

e p

oli

ce a

nd

th

en e

scap

ed i

nto

th

e ju

ng

le.

Th

e fi

rin

g c

on

tin

ued

. an

d t

he

po

lice

ev

en t

hre

aten

ed t

hem

to

su

rren

der

b

ut

they

did

no

t st

op

firi

ng

. G

ang

m

emb

ers

wer

e in

jure

d b

y p

oli

ce

wo

un

d,

bu

t th

ey s

ucc

eed

ed i

n e

s-ca

pin

g. T

he

inju

red

po

lice

men

w

ere

sen

t aw

ay f

or

imm

edia

te

med

ical

tre

atm

ent.

Th

e re

mai

nin

g

po

lice

men

fo

un

d t

hat

on

e o

f g

ang

m

emb

er w

as l

yin

g t

her

e an

d s

ince

th

ere

wer

e n

o t

race

s o

f li

fe l

eft

in

him

he

was

no

t ta

ken

to

th

e h

osp

i-ta

l. W

eap

on

an

d b

ull

ets

fou

nd

n

ear

him

wer

e se

aled

.

Jah

ul

wo

rked

as

a d

rive

r w

ith

Am

ar B

uil

der

s D

urg

36

Co

m-

pan

y, C

hh

atti

sgar

h.

On

11.

03.

2010

, h

is m

ob

ile

ph

on

e co

n-

tain

ing

th

e S

IM t

o t

he

ph

on

e n

um

ber

80

853

7876

6,

was

sto

-le

n.

Few

day

s la

ter,

wh

ile

he

was

sea

rch

ing

fo

r it

th

e p

erso

n

wit

h w

ho

m h

is p

ho

ne

was

, as

ked

him

to

mee

t n

ear

us

stan

d

in R

ajn

and

vil

lag

e, C

hh

atti

sgar

h.

On

16

.03.

2010

, Ja

hu

l w

ent

to t

he

bu

s st

and

wit

h h

is c

oll

eag

ues

Ale

em K

han

an

d

Kh

urs

hid

. B

ut

few

men

in

a w

hit

e In

dic

a ca

r ab

du

cted

Ja-

hu

l. J

ahu

l’s c

oll

eag

ues

in

form

ed t

he

loca

l p

oli

ce,

bu

t n

o a

c-ti

on

was

tak

en.

Bet

wee

n 1

1.0

3.20

10 a

nd

16

.03.

2010

, w

hen

fam

ily

in H

arya

na

trie

d t

o c

all

they

wer

e to

ld b

y an

un

kn

ow

n t

hat

th

e p

ho

ne

wil

l so

on

be

retu

rned

to

Jah

ul.

Bu

t la

ter

the

ph

on

e w

as

swit

ched

off

.

On

18

.03.

2010

at

aro

un

d 2

am,

fam

ily

was

in

form

ed b

y th

e p

oli

ce t

hat

Jah

ul

has

bee

n k

ille

d i

n a

n e

nco

un

ter

in A

u-

ran

gab

ad,

Mat

hu

ra.

Wh

en t

he

fam

ily

reac

hed

Mat

hu

ra,

they

no

tice

d t

wo

bu

llet

wo

un

ds

(in

his

mo

uth

an

d s

tom

-ac

h)

and

to

rtu

re m

ark

s o

n h

is d

ead

. P

oli

ce k

ept

on

th

reat

-en

ing

th

e fa

mil

y an

d d

elay

ing

wh

en f

amil

y tr

ied

to

tak

e Ja

hu

l’s b

od

y h

om

e. F

amil

y w

as f

orc

ed t

o b

ury

th

e b

od

y in

a

secl

ud

ed p

lace

so

mew

her

e in

Mat

hu

ra,

and

th

ey w

ere

no

t ev

en a

llo

wed

to

off

er p

raye

rs d

uri

ng

th

e b

uri

al.

Po

lice

file

d t

wo

FIR

s re

late

d

to t

he

inci

den

t o

n 1

7.0

3.20

10

i.e.

FIR

No

. 22

9/1

0 u

nd

er s

ec-

tio

ns

147,

14

8,

149

, 30

7, 5

04

, 50

6 o

f IP

C a

nd

FIR

No

. 23

0/1

0

un

der

sec

tio

n 2

5 o

f A

rms

Act

(t

her

e is

on

e m

ore

FIR

).

Jah

ul’s

mo

ther

Ch

hu

tni

wro

te

a le

tter

to

NH

RC

des

crib

ing

th

e w

ho

le i

nci

den

t, r

aisi

ng

d

ou

bts

ove

r th

e p

oli

ce s

tory

an

d s

eek

ing

mo

net

ary

sup

-p

ort

to

rai

se t

he

chil

dre

n o

f Ja

hu

l. T

he

cop

y o

f th

is l

ette

r w

ere

also

sen

t to

Pri

me

Min

-is

ter

of

Ind

ia,

Ho

me

Min

iste

r o

f In

dia

an

d C

hie

f M

inis

ter

of

Utt

ar P

rad

esh

.

A n

oti

ce w

as i

ssu

ed b

y D

elh

i S

essi

on

s C

ou

rt o

n 1

2.0

1.16

, d

irec

tin

g t

he

con

cern

ed S

HO

to

file

th

e re

po

rt o

n ‘d

eath

of

accu

sed

Jah

ul’.

No

fu

rth

er i

nfo

rmat

ion

ava

il-

able

. B

ut

the

fam

ily

has

no

t b

een

ab

le t

o p

rocu

re d

eath

ce

rtifi

cate

of

Jah

ul.

Nei

ther

th

ey h

ave

bee

n g

ran

ted

an

y co

mp

ensa

tio

n n

or

the

gu

ilty

p

oli

cem

en w

ere

pro

secu

ted

.

85


86

ANNEXE – V

Statement of recommendations by UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (2012); progress of implementation by India (2015); and our own remarks on the recommendations, based on Citizens Against Hate (CAH) fact finding investigation (2018). These last, mostly confirm SR’s update of 2015, informed by insights from the cases we studied.

Recommendations (2012) Progress CAH remarks based on fact finding

Violation of the right to life by state actors

# 1. India should swiftly enact the Prevention of Torture Bill and ensure its compliance with the Convention against Tor-ture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

No Not implemented yet.

Torture a common theme in Extraju-dicial Executions we investigated

# 4. Section 46 of the Criminal Procedure Code and legisla-tion in all states regarding use of force, including the excep-tional use of lethal force, by all security officers should be reviewed to ensure compliance with international human rights law principles of proportionality and necessity.

No Not implemented yet.

Excessive force common theme in cases investigated

# 5. Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code should be reviewed in order to remove any legal barriers for the crimi-nal prosecution of a public servant, including the need for prior sanction from the Government before cognizance can be taken of any offence by a public servant for criminal pros-ecution.

Partially In the cases investigated, we came across no case where officers respon-sible were being investigated

# 8. India should ensure that the registration of First Infor-mation Reports is prompt and made mandatory in all cases of unlawful killings and death threats. The authorities should put in place an independent mechanism to monitor the registration of such Reports following any request to do so, and to punish law enforcement officials who refuse to register them.

NO Not implemented yet.

FIRs are mostly not recorded of mur-der.

Police use identical set scenarios in FIRs across multiple cases.

9. India should ensure that command and/or superior re-sponsibility is applied for violations of the right to life by security officers.

No Senior police officers have been ac-cused by victims – in testimonies - of directly instigating the killings. and UP CM has publically claimed use of encounters as a means of crime con-trol (UP). Haryana CM was reported felicitating a senior police officer from UP for being ‘encounter cop’, and a role model.

Fight Against Impunity

12. India should put in place a mechanism of regular review and monitoring of the status of implementation of the direc-tives of the Supreme Court and the National Human Rights Commission guidelines on arrest, encounter killings, and custodial violence and death.

Sufficient information not provided to assess pro-gress.

We asked this question of NHRC in a RTI application. WE have not re-ceived this information yet.

Our assessment if no proactive action has been taken by SC and NHRC to monitor whether guidelines are being followed.

13. The establishment and effective functioning of the Inde-pendent Police Complaints Authorities should be made a priority in all states.

do We are not aware of this mechanism working.

14. Compensation in cases of killings cannot play the role of replacement for criminal prosecutions and punishment. Alongside payment of compensation to the victims or their families, India should ensure that criminal investigations, prosecutions and trials are launched and conducted in a swift, effective and impartial manner in all cases of unlawful

Partially im-plemented

In a few cases, NHRC has ordered compensation, but we are not aware of prosecution even in those cases.


15. Promotions and other types of awards for security officers suspected to have been involved in unlawful killings, includ-ing through encounters, should not be granted until a prop-er clarification of facts.

Sufficient information not provided

There are various cases of police offic-ers identified in encounters, being rewarded with commendations and service promotions.

Moreover, UP govt reportedly has a scheme for rewarding officers appre-hend criminals.

16. Autopsies should be carried out in conformity with inter-national standards, and families of victims should have full and easy access to autopsy reports, death certificates and other relevant documentation to allow them to proceed with the closure of the cases.

Sufficient information not provid-ed..

Out fact finding revealed, most fami-lies not provided these documents, in fact many prevented from getting these. For families trying to obtain these, the struggle is hard. In cases where autopsy conducted, not in ac-cordance with international practice, also in violation of SC and NHRC guidelines.

17. The Nanavati-Mehta Commission, and all currently func-tioning commissions of inquiry on various violations of the right to life, should ensure that their findings are published in a swift and transparent manner.

Not imple-mented

Not applicable

18. India should consider launching a process of reflection upon the need to reform its judiciary with the aim of reduc-ing the length of judicial proceedings and strengthening the independent functioning of the judiciary.

Sufficient information not provided

Not applicable

19. A credible Commission of Inquiry into extrajudicial exe-cutions in India, or at least the areas most affected by extra-judicial executions, which inspires the confidence of the people, should be appointed by the Government. The Com-mission should also serve a transitional justice role.

Partially im-plemented

No reports of commission of enquiry into these executions in UP and Har-yana, despite wide public information and outcry. NHRC has issued notices to UP state. But nothing is available in the public realm on the outcome.

Killing of vulnerable persons

20. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act should be reviewed with the aim of ex-tending its scope to Dalit Muslims and Dalit Christians.

Partially? Many victims in cases investigated by CAH belong to lower caste among Muslims. They are not included in the definition of the SC SC Act 2015.

21. The criminal legislation should be reviewed to ensure that all gender-based killings, as well as killings of any mem-ber of a tribe or lower caste receive high sentences, possibly under the form of life imprisonment.

Partially We have not come across any in-stance of an official being prosecuted and convicted.

22.An effective witness and victim protection programme should be established.

NO Almost all cases investigated had sur-vivor families and witnesses living in fear of police reprisal, and deciding not to press cases, or doing so only in the very rare case. Absence of victim and witness protection programme hampers access to justice.

Information and awareness-raising campaigns should be launched to raise the level of knowledge of human rights and access to justice of the public at large, with a particular focus on vulnerable persons such as women and members of tribes and lower castes. Legal aid mechanisms for these vul-nerable persons should be devised to enable them to seek protection, justice and redress in cases of violation of their rights.

Sufficient information not provided to assess pro-gress.

These cases of illegal execution are touted by state authorities including the heads of governments, as valid methods for fighting crime. These create in the minds of public servants legitimacy for these illegal acts.

87


88

NHRC

26. A legal basis should also be put in place to enable the extension of the period of one year under which the Nation-al Human Rights Commission can consider cases.

NO We came across many cases of execu-tions in the past, where victims could not take the cases forward including through NHRC processes, because of lack of information, ongoing pres-sures and the need to get on with life.

27. The National Human Rights Commission should issue guidelines on the conduct of inquests and autopsies in all cases of unlawful killings.

NO Guidelines on conduct of autopsies/Post mortem report have been have been issued. But what is missing is any tracking of the enforcement of those guidelines. Families we spoke with, not a part of those processes. And RTI questions from states and NHRC have not revealed much.

28. The independence and functioning of State human rights commissions should be reviewed to ensure compliance with the Principles relating to the status of national institutions.

NO We found no role of SHRCs in the cases. Despite widespread killings, no action by them to question police or get even a report on them.

Cooperation and engagement with International organ-isations

29. The practice of inviting United Nations special proce-dures should continue, especially in areas where interna-tional concern has been expressed, such as torture, counter-terrorism measures, enforced disappearances and minority rights. The recommendations made in 2012 by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders should be given serious consideration with a view to their implementation.

Partially The 2012 visit by the SR (on ESAE) and follow up of his recommenda-tions had positive impact in Mani-pur, where according to activists, ex-tra judicial executions, widespread in the past, have largely stopped. Need for HRC to keep up the engagement, however frustrating it might be, with the Government of India, in the in-terest of justice for victims in the re-cent case of executions in Uttar Pra-desh and Haryana too.

30. Ratification of the following treaties should take place promptly: (a) the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and its Optional Protocol; and (b) the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappear-ance.

NO No

31. Ratification of the following instruments should be con-sidered: (a) the two Optional Protocols to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; (b) the Optional Pro-tocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; (c) the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court; and (d) the two Protocols ad-ditional to the Geneva Conventions.

NO NO


Information to be sought from the family:

1. Victim detai ls a. Name b. Age c. Profession d. Family members/dependents e. What links did the vict im have with the Police before the incident, i f any?

2. Case

a. When did the fami ly come to know about the encounter? Were they informed about i t by the police? What were they informed about?

b. How many people were ki l led and injured? Were the injured provided medical treat-ment? Who bore the cost of the treatment?

c. Did the family receive dead body? Where was post -mortem conducted? Who con-ducted the post -mortem? Detai ls .

d. Was FIR regis tered? By police or family? Under what sections of law/what were the circumstances recorded? Does the fami ly agree with the version of the incident re-ported by police in FIR?

e. Has there been any enquiry into the case? Who is the enquiry officer? f . Did police/Magistrate record s tatements of family members or any witness which

fami ly know of? g. Did medical officer or magistrate record the s tatements of the injured? h. Has the family engaged any lawyer? i . Who are the accused as per the fami ly? Names, designation, police s tation. j . In the knowledge of the family, were the accused persons arrested? What is the bai l

status? k. Has there been any order from the court in the case? Any convictions? l . Was the fami ly granted any compensation? m. Has the family filed any complaint in court? n. Is there any cross case on the deceased and the injured? ( l ink to point d above)

3. Family’s socio -economic condition and needs, post the incident.

a. If the main bread winner, how has the fami ly been making both ends meet? b. If not , what has been the financia l impact of the ki l l ing? Widow, chi ldren, parents? c. Whether the ki l l ing has also been socia lly s tigmatizing for the fami ly? d. Any other impact on the family : loss of jobs , loss of education, fear and harassment

by police Information to be sought from the Police or collected through RTI: a. Purpose of encounter and narration of the incident. b. Under what section of law is the FIR in the case regis tered? c. Did police inform the fami ly about the incident? d. Who is the enquiry officer? Is the investigat ion being “conducted by the CID or po-

lice team of another police s tation under the supervision of a senior officer (at least a level above the head of the police party engaged in the encounter)”?

e. What is the s tatus of the enquiry (by independent agency and the one by the magis-trate)?

f . Were NHRC’s guidelines on custodia l/encounter ki l l ings/death in police action fo l-lowed, and appropriate reports sent to courts and NHRC?

- death entered in an appropriate register in Police s tation - Superintendent of Police (SP) informed NHRC of death in ‘police action’ , wi th in 48 hrs? - SP provided report to NHRC, within 3 months , along with Post -Mortem Re port , Inquest Report , Bal lis tic Report and findings of the Magisterial Inquiry . ( to

ANNEXE - VI a

Questionnaire: Encounter Killings

(Informed by relevant SC Judgement and NHRC Guidelines)

89


90

include Video filming of Post mortem examination; and use of Model Autopsy Re port & Additional Procedures for Inquest) . - Director General of Police (DGP) provided NHRC 6 monthly report of death i n ‘police ‘action’ . g. Detai ls of accused persons . Their arrest , bai l , suspension and conviction s tatus . h. Have the victim fami ly been rewarded any compensation? i . Have the accused persons been rewarded or given any promotion after the incident? OR disciplinary action been taken against them? Detai ls . Documents to be collected: 1 . FIR, including any ‘cross case’ FIR. 2. Any affidavi ts , s tatements filed by the fami ly 3. Case diary of the concerned police s tation, i f there was any tip off or information

from inte l l igence. 4. Police/CB -CID enquiry report (as per SC judgement)

a. Color photographs of the victim, confirmation on identi ty of the victim b. Was evidentiary materia l , including blood -stained earth, hair , fibers and

threads , etc. , related to the death recovered and preserved? c. Identification of scene witnesses (complete names , addresses and phone num-

bers) and their s tatements d. Cause, manner , location and time of death, as wel l as any pattern or practice

leading to i t . Was the cause natural, accidental , suicide or homicide . e. Chemical analysis of intact fingerprints of the deceased; any other re levant

fingerprint f . Post mortem reports , to be conducted by two doctors (one of them should be

in-charge/Head of the District Hospi ta l) , to be video graphed. g. Evidence of weapons, such as guns, projecti les , bullets and cartridge cases .

Tests for gunshot residue, trace metal detection. 5. SP’s reports to NHRC and DGP’s reports . 6. Magisteria l enquiry report 7. Court orders and Judgements Information to be sought from the Court: (by filing an application on behalf of family)

Did the Magistrate receive information about the incident, as per section 157 and 158 of CrPC, af ter filing of FIR at Police Station? When? Was there delay?

Detai ls of magisteria l inquiry. Was i t submitted in 3 months? Did the inquiry fol low NHRC guidelines?

Did the court conduct trial expeditiously?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5tnXnUUg3zKc1NzcHM4LWNIUzQ/view?usp=sharing

91


ANNEXE - VI b

Cit

ize

ns

Ag

ain

st H

ate

:

(cit

izen

sag

ain

sth

ate.

org

)

Fac

t fi

nd

ing

on

en

cou

nte

r k

illi

ng

s/cu

sto

dia

l d

eath

s

Init

ial

list

ing

fo

rm

SN

N

ame

of

dec

ease

d

Mri

tak

ka

Na

am

Ad

dre

ss (

vill

age/

mo

hal

la)

Pa

ta

So

urc

e o

f in

form

atio

n:

(med

ia,

or

in t

he

cou

rse

of

leg

al a

id w

ork

of

NG

O/c

ivil

so

ciet

y o

rg.

jaa

nk

aa

ri k

a s

ou

rce?

Nex

t o

f K

in

con

tact

per

son

(fat

her

, w

ife,

bro

ther

–

anyo

ne

wh

o i

s av

aila

ble

to

tal

k)

Co

nta

ct d

etai

ls

(ph

on

e n

um

-b

er e

tc.)

An

y fu

rth

er d

etai

ls a

bo

ut

inci

den

t:

Dat

e o

f in

cid

ent,

an

d p

lace

Wh

eth

er F

IR r

egis

tere

d b

y

po

lice

curr

ent

stat

e o

f th

e ca

se/i

nve

stig

atio

n

any

oth

er d

etai

ls?

1

2

3

4

5

6


92

ANNEXE - VI c

CA

H s

tud

y o

n E

JK

He

lpfu

l te

mp

late

s fo

r d

ocu

me

nta

tio

n

1. S

nap

sho

t o

f in

div

idu

al c

ases

:

Sl

no

.

Dat

e p

lace

o

f in

ci-

den

t

Vic

tim

n

ame,

d

etai

ls,

vill

age,

d

istr

ict.

Als

o

fam

ily

det

ails

(s

po

use

, ch

il-

dre

n)

Su

m-

mar

y o

f in

cid

ent

as r

ec-

ord

ed i

n

kn

ow

n

FIR

Su

m-

mar

y o

f F

IR d

e-ta

ils

(dat

e,

sec.

, ch

arg

-es

…)

Su

m-

mar

y o

f in

cid

ent,

p

er f

ami-

ly t

esti

-m

on

y

any

ref-

eren

ce

to i

nci

-d

ent

in

med

ia

rep

ort

s?

rele

van

t d

ocu

-m

ents

w

ith

fam

-il

y (a

nd

u

s)?

Act

ion

ta

ken

by

fam

ily

to

dat

e, t

o

trig

ger

le

gal

pro

-ce

edin

gs

/ se

ek j

us-

tice

?

any

kn

ow

led

ge

(an

d p

arti

ci-

pat

ion

) o

f fa

mil

y in

m

agis

teri

al

enq

uir

y?

Cu

rren

t st

atu

s o

f th

e ca

se

(per

fa

mil

y)

Sta

tus

of

inve

stig

a-ti

on

an

d

any

enq

uir

-ie

s (f

rom

m

edia

, o

th-

er s

ou

rces

),

and

of

the

case

gen

er-

ally

.

An

y co

mp

en-

sati

on

re-

ceiv

ed b

y fa

mil

y?

An

y fi

nan

cial

h

elp

fro

m

oth

er

sou

rces

?

An

y D

etai

ls

of

law

-ye

rs

and

so

cial

w

ork

ers

hel

p-

ing

, if

an

y?

1 2

3 4

5

6

7 8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1

5


2. Summary case narrative (500 words – single A4 page)

(Based on family’s testimony)

Outline:

i. Background (date, place, incident, and any cross reference to media reports)

ii. Background of the deceased: age, education, work, and any criminal record

iii. How the family came to know about the incident

iv. Version of the encounter story told to family by police

v. Version of the encounter story, the family believes is correct

vi. What the family did in the first 24 hrs and 48, to obtain body, get statutory documents (PM report, injury report); who were the interlocuters (lawyers, relatives, social workers), what officials did they meet in this process?

vii. What actions the family took, if any, to obtain justice (Viz, what steps to get case registered, or provide submission to magisterial enquiry and any other; or even attempts to reach out to senior political and administrative functionaries

viii. Summary of attitude of police in this?

ix. Current state of the family (livelihoods..) and access to justice

3. Legal document analysis (200 words)

i. Chain of events, as made out in FIR, including charges made, and sections of law used

ii. Review of documents available with family. What documents should have been there, and are missing?

iii. Whether, from the documents we have, the story holds up - analysis of anomalies in the story

iv. Our understanding, based on the documents, of the investigation made/in progress.

93