Police Encounter Was Avoidable Had State Acted Earlier: Gauhati High Court Awards ₹25 Lakh Compensation To Victim's Family
The Gauhati High Court has awarded compensation to the family of a cultivator from Chirang district who died during a police operation in December 2016, after holding that despite prior intelligence inputs, the authorities failed to act in a timely and documented manner, making the incident avoidable and resulting in infringement of Article 21.The division bench comprising Justice Kalyan...
The Gauhati High Court has awarded compensation to the family of a cultivator from Chirang district who died during a police operation in December 2016, after holding that despite prior intelligence inputs, the authorities failed to act in a timely and documented manner, making the incident avoidable and resulting in infringement of Article 21.
The division bench comprising Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Rajesh Mazumdar observed, “Timely appropriate action on the intelligence inputs was expected. The laxity on the part of the police authorities and the Army, who accompanied the police without keeping documented records, played a vital role in creating a situation leading to exchange of fire and death.”
“We stop short of concluding that the ambush was laid to achieve predicted outcomes,” the Bench, however, added.
As per the factual matrix of the case, the deceased was a cultivator by profession, residing in Chirang district, and is survived by his wife and three children. The writ petition proceeded on the projection that he had been illegally taken into custody and thereafter killed in a fake encounter. The respondents, however, maintained that he died during an ambush laid on the basis of intelligence inputs alleging that he was attempting to illegally deal in arms and ammunition with underground militant outfits.
After examining the record, the Court declined to order a fresh or de-novo investigation, noting that multiple investigative processes had already been undertaken and that the final report submitted by the police had been accepted by the jurisdictional court without objection from the wife of the deceased.
However, turning to the manner in which the operation was conducted, the Court found noted, “Records reveal that certain intelligence reports were received by the police authorities… to the effect that one Ratan Narzary @Rotan Narzary, who was the brother of the petitioner, was making attempts to sell some ammunition of particular makes of weapons to underground extremists and that the deal was not being settled. There were further intelligence inputs that some attempt to deal in the ammunition may take place on or about 27th or 28th December 2016.”
Taking note of the absence of proper documentation and delayed intervention despite advance inputs, the Court concluded, “The encounter was, in the opinion of this Court, avoidable had timely action been taken on the intelligence inputs and if that be so, it has to be held that the fundamental right of the deceased and his legal heirs under Article 21 of the Constitution have been infringed, deserving relief in the form of appropriate compensation.”
Accordingly, the Court directed, “The Union of India, through the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Defence and the respondent No. 4, the State of Assam, through the Commissioner and Secretary to Government of Assam, Home Department to respectively pay a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- each to Sarabati Narzary, wife of late Ratan Narzary, village Kumguri, P.S. Runikata, District Chirang, Assam and a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- by each of respondent no 1 and respondent no 4 respectively to each surviving child of deceased Ratan Narzary, as compensation for the death of Late Ratan Narzary.”
Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed to this limited extent.
Case Title: Anil Narzary v Union of India & Ors
Case Number: WP(C)/1098/2017