SIT Probe Into 'Anti-Naxal Operations' By Police Undermines Federal Structure, Permitted Only In Exceptional Cases: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that anti-naxal operations, being part of regular counter-insurgency measures undertaken by State or Central Security forces, cannot be subjected to investigation by SIT, unless exceptional circumstances warrant such intervention. Permitting a SIT probe into regular field operations would not only undermine the federal structure of policing powers but also set a precedent inconsistent with established legal and administrative principles, it said. The Court thus dismissed a man's plea seeking constitution of SIT from outside the State to investigate the alleged fake encounter of his father–purported to be a Maoist–by security personnel.A division bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru in its order said:"Anti-naxal operations, being part of regular counter-insurgency measures undertaken by the State or Central Security forces, cannot be subjected to investigation by the SIT, as prayed by the petitioner, unless exceptional circumstances warrant such intervention. Routine operations conducted by security personnel in Naxal-affected areas aimed at maintaining law and order and combating insurgency fall within the domain of the State Police forces and Central Paramilitary Agencies operating under lawful authority. Directing investigation by SIT into such regular field operations would not only undermine the federal structure of policing powers but also set a precedent inconsistent with established legal and administrative principles. Only in instances where credible allegations of excesses, misuse of power, or violations of human rights arise, and where an impartial probe is deemed necessary to uphold justice, can the judiciary consider entrusting such matters to the SIT but no such circumstances exists in the present case. Hence, no such relief can be granted to the petitioner". The court further noted that it was not disputed that the deceased was not in touch with his family since 2007, when he left his house. It was also not disputed that the deceased was a naxalite and as many as 29 cases were registered in Chhattisgarh, 2 in Telangana and 6 in Maharashtra. The court noted that the plea indicated a "mere assumption" on the part of the petitioner and his mother that the deceased was subjected to torture by the Police/security personnel and thereafter executed in a cold blooded manner and a fake story of encounter has been concocted. The court said that the petitioner's mother is not an expert to say that the injuries on the deceased body were caused intentionally by police. It also noted that the State had followed the guidelines as mandated by the Apex Court in People's Union for Civil Liberties case as well as guidelines issued by the NHRC. It noted that the criminal antecedents of the deceased have also been detailed in the State's reply which was not rebutted by the petitioner. "Merely on the basis of certain injuries on the body of the deceased, the encounter which took place between the Police and the Maoist cannot be held to be an act of extra judicial killing. Even if no police personnel was injured, that cannot lead to a conclusion that no such encounter had taken place...On specific query with regard to involvement of the deceased in Maoist activities, Mr. Gonsalves does not have any reply and submits that the deceased could or could not have been a part of the said banned organization and reiterates that no FIR has been registered against the security personnel on the request made by the petitioner and his mother," the court addedThe court also noted that there had been been recovery of "arms, ammunition, presence of nitrate in the palm" of the deceased which points to the fact that he had opened fired upon the security personnel and in the said encounter, he got shot dead. It said:"Encounters in Naxal-dominated zones are military-style anti-insurgency operations. It is not uncommon for few deaths or one-sided casualties due to surprise or superior tactical position. Therefore, the absence of police casualties cannot by itself imply falsity. The guidelines issued by the Apex Court in People's Union for Civil Liberties (supra) are procedural safeguards but any defect / lapses / non-compliance alone does not automatically imply that the encounter was fake...This petition is based purely on the apprehension of the petitioner and his mother that the deceased did not die in an anti-naxal operation but was firstly arrested/taken into custody, tortured and then killed by the security personnel. However, there is no material on record to substantiate the said allegation and on the contrary, the reply/return filed by the State clearly discloses that the deceased alongwith other person, died in antinaxal operation being carried by the State's security forces." Noting that the petitioner had failed to make out a case warranting court interference, the Court said that the petitioner had harped on the issue...

SIT Probe Into 'Anti-Naxal Operations' By Police Undermines Federal Structure, Permitted Only In Exceptional Cases: Chhattisgarh High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags