STRUCTURES OF VIOLENCE

189 | Structures of Violence
Before considering the SHRC decision for the
purposes of analysis, a brief mention of two
documents on record need be made.
On 13 May 2002, the Senior Superintendent of Police
[SSP], Srinagar, wrote a letter to the Additional
Director General of Police [ADGP], Criminal
Investigation Department [CID] of Jammu and
Kashmir Police, conrming that the victim was picked
up on 10 June 1994 by the BSF and that since that date
his whereabouts are not known. On 21 June 2002, the
ADGP, CID, Jammu and Kashmir, Srinagar, wrote a
letter [the copy on record is an unsigned document] to
the Deputy Commissioner, Budgam and conrmed
that the victim was picked up on 10 June 1994 by the
th
30 Battalion BSF. Further, the letter conrmed that the
victim was not involved in subversive activities and
was still missing.
The above two documents conrm the abduction, the
unit responsible, the innocence of the victim and the
continued disappearance. This may now be seen
along with the SHRC decision of 20 March 2003. The
SHRC decision was based on a 10 February 2003
report from the Crime Branch. The Crime Branch
recorded statements of witnesses, including
Mohammad Younis Bazaz. This witness, who was also
lifted by the BSF on the same day, conrmed that he
had seen the victim at Neelam Chowk, Srinagar where
the BSF was stationed at a migrant house. The victim
had been brought by SI Vinod Kumar.
Further, the Crime Branch concluded that the victim
was not associated with any banned party. The BSF
informed the Crime Branch that they had not lifted the
victim. Based, it would seem purely on the submission
of the BSF, and discounting the testimony of
Mohammad Younis Bazaz, the SHRC concluded that,
while the victim was an innocent person and was now
disappeared, it could not be conrmed that he had
th
been abducted by the 30 Battalion of the BSF.
Therefore, rather disturbingly, despite a clear
conclusion on behalf of investigating agencies that the
th
victim was abducted by the 30 Battalion BSF, and one
strong eye-witness testimony that names SI Vinod
Kumar, the SHRC was unable to conrm the abduction
details and specically indict SI Vinod Kumar.
Similarly, the police too have closed the case as
untraced.
The IPTK sought information on 10 January 2012 on
all inquiries and Court-Martials conducted by the BSF
between 1990 and 2011 in Jammu and Kashmir but no
information was provided.
Further, the IPTK sought information on 10 January
2012 on all cases of sanctions for prosecution under
AFSPA relating to the Ministry of Home Affairs
between 1990 and 2011 in Jammu and Kashmir but
no information was provided.
Case No. 27
Victim Details
Bilal Ahmad Khanday [Enforced disappearance]
Age: 20 years
Occupation: Student [Third year, Bachelor of Science]
Son of: Ghulam Mohammad Khanday
Resident of: SumbalSonawari, Bandipora district
Alleged Perpetrators
1. Ghosh, Colonel [Commanding Ofcer], 10
Bihar Regiment, Manasbal, Safapora Camp
Case Information
The 10 Bihar Regiment, stationed at Safapora Camp,
picked up Bilal Ahmad Khanday on 6 July 1994. The
victim and his friends were crossing the river Jhelum,
near the new bridge at Sumbal. The patrolling army
arrested him near the riverbank.
The family approached the higher authorities,
including the Minister of State for Home,
Superintendent of Police, Deputy Commissioner
Baramulla but no information about the whereabouts
of the victim were given. Commanding Ofcer Ghosh
threatened the family of the victim to not lodge any FIR
in the police station. The family also approached the
court and led a petition.
The brother of the victim, Showkat Ahmad Khanday,
gave the above statement to IPTK on 23 April 2015.
The documents available on le conrm the
allegations of the victim family.
The State Human Rights Commision [SHRC] issued a
decision on 8 October 2001. The decision begins with
a summary of the complaint which includes a
reference to an earlier arrest of the victim in 1992 by
“security forces” but he was then released. Further,
after his disappearance in 1994, the father of the victim
approached the Commanding Ofcer of the 10 Bihar
Regiment at Safapora and told him what had
happened. The SHRC decision then notes that a
missing report – No.7 dated 11 November 1995 – was
entered by the Sumbal Police Station. Further, the
police before the SHRC conrm that the victim was
picked up by personnel of the 10 Bihar at Manasbal,
Safapora. The SHRC recommended ex-gratia relief of
Rs. 1 lakh.
Petition [HC No. 892/1994] was led in Srinagar High
Court and notice was issued on 28 September 1994.
The present status of the petition is not known. Further
information on this petition was sought through RTI
dated 15 July 2015.
Also on le is an undated communication from Station
House Ofcer [SHO] Police Station Sumbal to the
Tehsildar, Sumbal, Sonawari. This communication
states that the police recorded the statement of the