Our reply in connection with Case no. 175/25/4/2011 – torture upon HRD

Our reply in connection with Case no. 175/25/4/2011 – torture upon HRD

source: mailed by Suresh Bhat

17th February 2012

The Chairman
National Human Rights Commission
Faridkot House
Copernicus Marg
New Delhi-110001
Ref:- Your letter dated 27.1.2012 in connection with Case no. 175/25/4/2011
Our complaint dated 17.2.2011
Sub.:- Reply against police report
Respected Sir,
We received your letter dated 27.1.2012 in connection with Case no. 175/25/4/2011 and the report of the SDPO, Durgapur attached with the letter.
We have perused the report and place our comments for your kind perusal on the report as follows:-
The SDPO, Durgapur in his report stated that “…on 21.12.2010 O/C Pandabeswar Police Station along with other officer and force being accompanied by the then CI (B), Durgapur held a raid at Kendra, Chhatadhaorah and its adjoining area to arrest the FIR named accused persons but no fruitful result could be achieved. During raid the Police personnel had been to the house of FIR named accd Subad Ali Khan …”—regarding this point we want to comment that the SDPO, Durgapur admitted that the police party was present in the house of the victim on 21.12.2010. He did not mention the name of the so called “other officer” who was present with the police party. Why he concealed the name of this “other officer”? Is he trying to save any police officer? If the police raid was valid as claimed in the report then why he did not feel it necessary to disclose the name of such “other officer”? We have definite information that the SDPO, Durgapur was himself present with the police party which raided in the house of the victim on 21.12.2010. But he did not admit the same in his report.  The SDPO, Durgapur Mr. Joy Biswas stated before the news media that they had information that someone was coming from Birbhum who was going to take shelter in the victim’s house for which they went for a search in the house of the victim. Such statement of the SDPO, Durgapur Mr. Joy Biswas was made before the news reporters and the same was published. We have attached the scan copy of the said news paper cutting with this reply. The SDPO, Durgapur has no power to this enquiry as he was himself present with the police party and we demand that the concerned police authority must be directed to disclose all the names of the police personnel who were present during the raid in the house of the victim on 21.12.2010 for proper disposal of the case.
Moreover, it is quite improbable to believe that such huge police personnel went to arrest the FIR named accused persons in four cases (as mentioned in the report) but they failed to apprehend none of them. What a remarkable efficiency shown by the police party!!! We must say that the SDPO, Durgapur presented his statement regarding the purpose of the raid, the purpose of presence of the huge police personnel in the house of the victim (only to arrest him!!!) in a dubious and cryptic manner. He did not place supporting police records in support of his statement. The Police Regulations of Bengal mandates that day to day proceeding of the police station must be recorded in the General Diary Entry (GDE) Book of police station. So here we expect that the police of Pandabeswar Police Station should have had recorded the information about the commencement and purpose of the raid by the police party on 21.12.2010 in the General Diary Entry Book, but here the SDPO, Durgapur in his report did not mention any reference of the GDE entries made on 21.12.2010 at Pandabeswar Police Station over the subject matter in issue. We demand that Pandabeswar Police Station must be directed to place its GDE records made on 21.12.2010 to testify the veracity of the statement of the SDPO, Durgapur.
The SDPO, Durgapur in his report stated that “… During raid the Police personnel had been to the house of FIR named accd Subad Ali Khan and to secure arrest him in c/w Pandabeswar PS Case no.58/2010 dt. 12.11.10 u/s 143/341/506 IPC, 25/27 Arms Act & 9(b) (II) I.E. Act…”- regarding this point we want to comment that arresting of any accused person in connection with any pending criminal case is one of the parts of investigation and the Investigation Officer of the case has power to arrest the accused person if he considers the arrest to be prominent for the purpose of the investigation. But here the report never uttered a single word whether the Investigation Officer in c/w Pandabeswar PS Case no.58/2010 was present with the raiding police party or not.
The SDPO, Durgapur in his report stated that “…During local enquiry it also revealed that the petitioner Subad Ali Khan is a desperate and dangerous and most rowdy in nature and he used to create problem in the area off and on for showing his muscle power…”—-Regarding this point we want to comment that the SDPO did not mention the date, time and place as when he made such so called “local enquiry”.  We understand that local enquiry means gathering of facts by talking with local people of the vicinity and noting down their statements. But here the SDPO, Durgapur did not mention any name of person/persons who took part in such so called “local enquiry” and from whom he gathered information on the reputation of the victim. We hereby attached one character certificate issued by the Prodhan(Head) of Kendra Gram Panchayat certifying that the victim was the elected member of Kendra Gram Panchayat and he bears a good, moral character. The SDPO, Durgapur by his statement made character assassination of the victim in an unfair and dishonest way and he by his mere statement tried to present an untrue picture of the targeted person i.e. the victim without any substance. It is a form of defamation.
The inquirer i.e. the SDPO, Durgapur is nothing but a paid partisan agent of the police administration which repeatedly subjected the victim into torture and harassment and the victim had to lodge specific complaints against the perpetrator police personnel to save his life, liberty and rights. The fact remains that the victim had lodged one complaint before the West Bengal Human Rights Commission against police harassment and in the matter of the said complaint, the Additional S.P. Durgapur vide communication dated 5.7.2004 asked the victim to meet with him in his office. One scan copy of the said communication is duly attached with this reply. The victim duly met with him (the Additional S.P. Durgapur) in his office but till date the victim did not get any outcome of his complaint. Moreover the victim was arrested on 5.2.2007 by the police of Pandabeswar Police Station and he was illegally detained by police. The wife of the victim lodged specific written complaint at ACJM Court, Durgapur in the matter.
Lastly, we being the complainant in this case were not given any opportunity to place our stand before the enquiring officer i.e.  The SDPO, Durgapur. Moreover he neither met with the victim nor with his family members to get their statement over the incident which is the subject matter in issue in this present case. Here we understand that an enquiry means a systematic investigation of a matter of public interest. But all our hope to get a systematic and neutral investigation was pinned down in this case by the biased and concocted report place by the SDPO, Durgapur.
Hence we demand that the report placed by the SDPO, Durgapur should be rejected considering the comments made by as above and direct that a neutral investigation should be made in this case by the investigation wing of the Commission.
Thanking You,
Yours truly,
Kirity Roy
Secretary, MASUM

Invitation – 10 Years of Gujarat Carnage

Movement for Secular Democracy(MSD)

c/o Narmad- Meghani Library, Mithakhali Railway Crossing, Mithakhali, Ahmedabad 380006, Ph No-079-26404418 dn.rath@gmail.com
       People’s Union For Civil Liberties(PUCL)
 C/O Gandhi Peace Foundation, Himavan, Paldi, Ahmedabad-380 006.
Correspondence Address:
4, Sanmitra Society, Jivraj Park Area, Opp. Malav Talav, Ahmedabad-380 051. GUJARAT.gthaker1946@gmail.com,
10 Years of Gujarat Carnage
26th February- Citizen’s Convention
Mehandi Nawab Jung Hall Paldi , Ahmedabad At 2P.M.
Demonstration at 5 PM Paldi Char Rasta, Ahmedabad


It is going to be the 10 years of Gujarat Carnage.

Movement for Secular Democracy (MSD) and People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) from Ahmedabad, Gujarat are going to hold a  A Citizen’s Convention on 26th  February at 2 P.M.

This  Citizen’s Conference  will   focus on  how  the justice has been eluded to the riot victims after a decade of Carnage. Rule of law trampled, human rights violated,  a regime of FEAR has been deeply percolated in a fascist manner under the Chief Minister of Gujarat Mr. Narendra Modi, who is manoeuvring  all kinds of sinister design to make  a mockery of the criminal Justice to get clean chit . The so- called developmental plank is elusive and an eye wash of Mr. Modi to divert the attention of his implicit and explicit! Involvement in the Carnage2002   having the blessings of the corporate houses.

This  Citizen’s Conference will too focus. on developing  a broad based   platform of all concerned citizens and organisation to combat fascist onslaught in Gujarat and march forward with democratic people’s  movement.thatis Lok Andolan, which is the only way out.

This programme is the part of Insaf Ki Dagar Par .

Thanking You,
Yours Friendly
Prakash N. Shah
Gautam Thaker  09825382556
Dwarika Nath Rath 09426369858
Date- 19-2-2012

Is the Raghavan SIT in Undue Haste for a Closure? – Open letter

Is the Raghavan SIT in Undue Haste for a Closure? – Open letter

source mailed by: Suresh Bhat

India: Is the Raghavan SIT in Undue Haste for a Closure? – Open letter

Don’t scuttle the investigation to fix responsibility for 2002 massacre in Gujarat!
Wednesday 8 February 2012
We, the undersigned members of civil society, were aghast to learn from newspaper reports that RK Raghavan, the head of the Special Investigative Team (SIT), is planning to file a closure report, and has no intention of filing charges against Narendra Modi and his co-conspirators for being allegedly complicit in the horrific massacre in Gujarat in 2002 which resulted in the death of over a thousand innocent citizens and extensive destruction of private and public property.
It has been claimed that enough evidence exists to show that Modi allowed the charred bodies from Godhra to be paraded in the streets of Ahmedabad in spite of being warned that such an act would be blatantly provocative and dangerous, and that he instructed his senior police officers to stand back and let Hindus express their anger during the ’bandh’ that had been called by the VHP and endorsed by the BJP.
Repeated and desperate calls for help from Ehsan Jafri, former MP, to Modi’s office were ignored with the result that Jafri’s house was attacked and he was murdered. His widow’s appeal to the Supreme Court for justice is being rebuffed by Raghavan in spite of reports that the amicus curiae, Raju Ramachandran, had hinted that there were grounds for prosecution. Sources allege that Raghavan will file a summary report with the recommendation to treat the complaint of Zakia Jafri and Teesta Setalvad (of Citizens for Justice and Peace) as “neither true nor false” or “false but not maliciously false”, thus protecting Modi from having his day in court.
Raghavan’s SIT has also been charged with ignoring massive evidence brought forth by courageous and conscientious police officers such as RB Sreekumar, Rahul Sharma and Sanjiv Bhatt. In a public letter former Director General of Police in Gujarat, RB Sreekumar says, “I have submitted nine affidavits to the Nanavati Commission so far which provide unchallengeable evidence about the sabotage of criminal ju stice system, intimidation of witnesses, use of punishment and rewards to coerce officers to implement Modi governments covert agenda of Hindu sectarian mobilisation. But all these have been ignored by the SIT.” The former DGP further states that even after submitting the evidence to the SIT in 2008, he was neither called for examination nor made a witness during the ongoing trial in the riot case of Naroda Patiya.
IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt in a letter to Raghavan has said, “It seems that the SIT, for some inexplicable reason, is continuing to intentionally disregard very important aspects of the investigation into the complaint of Zakia Jafri. Nothing illustrates this better than the reluctance of the SIT to examine witnesses, who would be able to provide very vital information about the meeting held at the residence of the Chief Minister Narendra Modi on the late night of February 27, 2002.”
The SIT seems to have also decided to ignore the testimony of Justice Iyer and Justice Sawant who had headed a citizens’ panel to investigate the 2002 Gujarat massacre. Their report includes testimony of the then Gujarat BJP minister Haren Pandya (who was later murdered) who had testified about the meeting convened by Modi on the evening of the Godhra train burning in which officials were instructed not to obstruct the Hindu rage following the incident.
The proposed closure, if it happens, will add insult to injury for the victims of the massacre and their families and will exacerbate inter-community tensions. People will lose faith in our judicial system. The ability of the powerful to manipulate the course of justice will do serious harm to people’s faith in the system. It is obvious to many of us that an attempt at a massive cover-up is at work. It would be better if Modi answered the charges against him so that the matter is cleared and the issue of the accountability of a chief minister is addressed.
People must speak out against such gross abuse of our judicial system. We owe it to ourselves and to our children.
 Prof. Juzar Bandukwala,Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer, Dr Ram Punyani,  Subhashini Ali, Rohini Hensman, Jyoti Punwani,  Ghulam Mohiyuddin, Ammu Abraham, Shahid Ali Khan, NP Ashley, Suhail Reza, A Faizur Rahman
 Dolphy D’Souza, Oosman Pasha, Abdul Hafiz Lakhani, Rebecca Kurian, Kasim Sait, Sukla Sen, Shahidur Rashid Talukdar, Najid Hussain, Dr Mookhi Amir Ali, Azim Khan, Mohamed Firoz, Nasreen Fazalbhoy, Pi Nowshad, Ikramulla Md., Altaf Pasha, Dr Zaheer Sayeed, Zaffarullah Khan, Navaid Hamid

Illegal detention, torture in police custody and registration of false case & extortion

Illegal detention, torture in police custody and registration of false case & extortion

source mailed by : Suresh Bhat

10th February 2012

The Chairman
National Human Rights Commission
Faridkot House
Copernicus Marg
New Delhi-110001
Respected Sir,
We lodge this present complaint on behalf of the victims Mr. Rajjak Mondal and Mr. Fajlur Mondal from District-North 24 Parganas who are presently languishing in jail since 01.01.2012 on allegation of illegally possessing ‘Ganja’. The family members of the victims vehemently contradicted such allegation and claimed that the police leveled false allegations against the victims out of conspiracy. The family members of the victims alleged that the police of Baduria and Basirhat Police Station arrested the victims from their houses on 29.12.2011 at about 2 hours without disclosing any reason and without issuing any memo of arrest; they were also beaten by police at the time of arrest. Moreover the police also subjected them to torture in police lock up, allegedly compelled the victim’s family to give bribe to police and illegally detained them until they were produced before magistrate on 1.1.2012. Our attached fact finding report gives details of the incident. Here the family members of the victims brought direct allegation of torture while in custody which amounts to criminal offence and violation of law as laid down in Criminal Procedure Code (Sections 50, 50-A, 55-A, 57 and 60-A ) and also violation of the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in DK Basu judgment.
Hence we seek your urgent intervention in this case in the following manner:-
·         The whole matter must be investigated by a neutral investigating agency appointed by the Commission
·         The perpetrator police personnel must be booked immediately under the law and punished accordingly
·         The victims must be relieved immediately from all false and concocted allegations.
·         The victims must be given adequate protection and compensation.
Thanking You,
Yours truly,
Kirity Roy
Secretary, MASUM & National Convener, PACTI 
Particulars of the victims:- (1) Mr. Rajjak Mondal, son of Mr. Rashid Mondal, aged about-29 years, by faith-Muslim, by occupation- daily wage earner, residing at village-Srikati, Police Station-Baduria, District-North 24 Parganas; (2) Mr. Fajlur Mondal, son of Mr. Abdar Mondal, residing at village-Srikati, Police Station-Baduria, District-North 24 Parganas
Particulars of the perpetrators: – The involved police personnel of Baduria Police Station and Basirhat Police Station 
Date & time of incident: – On 29.12.2011 at about 2.00 hours and subsequent thereafter.
Fact Finding Detail:-
It is revealed during the fact finding that the victims are now languishing at Dum Dum Central Correctional Home (Jail) since 1.1.2012. They are being detained in jail as under trial prisoners(UTP) in connection with Basirhat Police Station Case no. 643/2011 dated 31.12.2011 under section 20(b)(i) of NDPS Act. According to the police complaint, the victims were arrested from Moylakhola Bus Stand on 31.12.2011 in the evening hours and 6.700 Kilograms of ‘Ganja’ could be recovered from their possession. As they did not produce any valid documents for possessing the said article (Ganja), they were implicated in the aforesaid criminal case and the police investigation is in progress.
According to the family members of both the victims that both the victims are innocent and they have been roped into false allegations by police out of conspiracy so that they could be detained for long period behind the bar.
The family members of the victim Mr. Rajjak Mondal stated before our fact finding that on 29.12.2011 at about 2.00 hours in the midnight about 6/7 police personnel of Baduria Police Station and Basirhat Police Station raided into their house and forcibly captured him. They started beating him by their wooden sticks and rifle butts. In a similar manner the said police personnel also raided the house Mr. Fajlur Mondal and forcibly took him into their custody. Here also the police personnel beat Mr. Fajlur Mondal by their wooden sticks and rifle butts. The police did not disclose any reason for their apprehension and no memo of arrest was arrest was issued at the time of their apprehension. Many local people witnessed the incident as told by the family members of the victims before our fact finding team. Then in the morning Mr. Rashid Mondal, the father of the victim Mr. Rajjak Mondal came to Basirhat Police Station and he came to know from Mr. Rajjak Mondal that on the last night one Mr. Sanjoybabu, police officer of Basirhat Police Station mercilessly assaulted him to confess according to his desire. The other victim Mr. Fajlu Mondal also came under such torture in the hands of the said police officer. On 30.12.2011 one Mr. Sahabab Mondal who reportedly works as an informer to local police contacted with Mr. Rashid Mondal, the father of the victim Mr. Rajjak Mondal and told him that the police officer Mr. Sanjoybabu would stop torturing his son if he agrees to pay Rs.3000/- to the police officer Sanjoybabu. Mr. Rashid Mondal to save the life of his son gave Rs.3000/ to the said Mr. Sahabab Mondal and it is also revealed that the said amount was handed over to the said police officer Mr. Sanjoybabu. Later on 2.1.2012 the family members of the victims came to know from one news paper report that the victims were implicated in a criminal case of illegally possessing ‘Ganja’. 
The family members of both the victims stated before our fact finding team that they are poor people being daily wage earner and the victims have been falsely implicated in false charges out of local political rivalry.  

Kirity Roy
Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha