Supreme Court Asks Assam Human Rights Commission To Enquire Into Alleged Fake Encounters In State

The Supreme Court today directed the Assam Human Rights Commission (Assam HRC) to conduct an independent and expeditious enquiry into allegations of fake police encounters in the State of Assam.The directions were passed in a petition alleging rampant "fake" encounters in the State as well as non-compliance by state authorities with the directions issued in PUCL v. State of Maharashtra pertaining to investigation of police encounters. The petitioner, an advocate, had brought as many as 171 instances to the notice of the Court.A bench of Justices Kant and N Kotiswar Singh observed that the role of human rights commissions as protectors of civil liberties was paramount and expressed confidence that the Assam HRC would perform its duties effectively."We deem it appropriate to entrust the enquiry for this matter to the State HRC for advancing it to its logical conclusion...the matter is directed to be re-instated on the board of the State HRC for necessary enquiry into the allegations, independently and expeditiously in accordance with law...[It must be ensured] that victims of the alleged incidents or their family members are given fair and meaningful opportunity to participate in the proceedings. To that end, we direct the State HRC to issue public notice inviting all individuals who claim to be aggrieved victims...State HRC to ensure confidentiality with respect to the identity of the victims, their families or other individuals who approach", the Court ordered.Notably, it was observed that each of the 171 cases highlighted by the petitioner warranted objective scrutiny, but blanket directions on mere compilation of cases were not justified."the appellant has placed before the Court as many as 171 individual instances, each warranting objective scrutiny...it must however be borne in mind that a mere compilation or aggregation of cases does not by itself call for omnibus directions...The allegations that some of these incidents may involve fake encounters are indeed serious and if proven, would amount to a grave violation of right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. It is however equally possible that upon a fair, impartial and independent investigation, some of these cases may turn out to be necessary and legally justified. This distinction is critical...".In the context of the PUCL judgment, which provides for registration of FIR, magisterial enquiry, compensation and informing the next-of-kin in cases of police encounters, the Court stated, “They [guidelines issued in PUCL] in a way re-affirm the primacy of rule of law and the [bedrock] of our constitutional democracy...this Court authoritatively held that no individual or institution...is above the law. It cautioned against the emerging culture of glorifying police encounters as indicators of effective policing...”.As per the judgment, the Assam HRC would be at liberty to initiate further investigations into the allegations and the state authorities shall cooperate fully as well as remove any institutional barriers in the enquiry process.The Court also instructed the Assam HRC to adopt measures to safeguard identities of the alleged victims/their family members/witnesses and to approach the matter with sensitivity. To ensure that the victims are not disadvantaged, it called on the Assam State Legal Services Authority to provide legal aid to those in need.After the judgment was dictated, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta expressed concerns about liberty given to the petitioner for offering legal assistance to the alleged victims. "That might encourage blackmailing. This might normalize something, which I don't want to say", the SG said.However, Justice Kant refused to alter the judgment. “Let's have faith in the system...If any individual wants, they can engage him", the judge said.On the question of locus standi of the petitioner, the Court observed, “We have examined the locus of the appellant…we deem it appropriate to acknowledge the role played by the appellant in bringing to the Court's attention a matter that raises grave concern…it is not uncommon in situations involving alleged abuse of power by state actors for the affected individuals to remain silent...".It also said that while several instances highlighted by the appellant alleged procedural non-compliance with PUCL guidelines, many could be factually incorrect. Prima facie, it was opined that except in a few cases, it was difficult to conclude that there was a violation of the guidelines.The above observations however ought not to be seen as casting aspersions on investigation by the state authorities, the Court remarked."several instances cited by the appellant to demonstrate procedural non-compliance with PUCL guidelines may be factually incorrect...the appellant has not been able to independently place on record any cogent material to substantiate the allegations. He has merely relied on data furnished by the state itself...after minutely scanning such data, prima facie it seems...

Supreme Court Asks Assam Human Rights Commission To Enquire Into Alleged Fake Encounters In State

Debby Jain & Amisha Shrivastava

Tags