STRUCTURES OF VIOLENCE

255 | Structures of Violence
- Witness Shabir Ahmad Malik refers to a
“Mohammad Yassir” accompanying him with the
army personnel to Balhama. Despite the minor
discrepancy in the name, it would seem
reasonable to conclude that this was witness Yasir
Ahmad Malik. But, Shabir Ahmad Malik's version
of events after the petitioner came to the work
shop differs in some respects from Yasir Ahmad
Malik's version. Yasir Ahmad Malik states that he
was a part of the group that accompanied the
petitioner and his wife that day, whereas Shabir
Ahmad Malik does not include him. Further, Yasir
Ahmad Malik states they went to Balhama and
then a RR Camp and then nally to the RR Camp
at Khrew. Shabir Ahmad Malik does not mention
going to Balhama and he states they went to the
Khrew Camp rst and then to the camp at Sheer
village. Further, Yasir Ahmad Malik appears to
suggest that only the manager and the petitioner
went to the RR Camp while Shabir Ahmad Malik
states that the entire group was present. Further,
the petitioner's evidence seems to contradict
these two witnesses as well in terms of the camps
approached and the persons present.
Despite the above inconsistencies, the enquiry
report's conclusions appear reasonable. The role of V.
K. Mishra [alleged perpetrator no. 3] is clear. Colonel
Rajbeer Singh [alleged perpetrator no. 2] and V.K.
Mishra [alleged perpetrator no. 3] also appear to have
knowledge of the abduction of the victim.
Further, their role in the incident must be considered in
light of the fact that they were unable to produce any
evidence of the release of the victim by personnel
under their command.
In these circumstances, they would also be
reasonably indicted. Naik [Corporal] Balbir Singh, 7
Para RR [alleged perpetrator no.4] and Havaldar
[Retired] Balakrishna Sohan [alleged perpetrator no.5]
have been found involved the crime through
investigations.
In addition to why it took eight years for a chargesheet
to be led in this case it needs to be ascertained
whether the chargesheet led to any prosecutions.
Further, the available documents do not suggest that
even a Court-Martial was conducted in this case by
the army.
Case No. 70
Victim Details
Manzoor Ahmad Mir [Enforced Disappearance]
Occupation: Mason
Son of: Ghulam Mohammad Mir
Spouse: Haseena
Resident of: Tantray Pora Delina, Baramulla District
Alleged Perpetrators
1. Captain Atul Sharma [Operational name:
Sameer], In-charge, 22 Rashtriya Ries [RR],
Army, Camp Delina
2. Mohammad Yousuf Mir, Government
Gunman [Ikhwan]
3. Manzoor Ahmad Mir, Government Gunman
[Ikhwan]
Case Information
Manzoor Ahmad Mir was picked up from his house on
7 September 2003 and has subsequently
disappeared. The family of the victim states that
Captain Atul Sharma, along with two Ikhwan's,
Mohammad Yousuf Mir and Manzoor Ahmad Mir, and
20 to 25 soldiers of the 22 RR arrived at the victim's
residence at about 10:30 pm and arrested the victim.
No incriminating material was found in the house. The
family of the victim approached the 22 RR for the
release of the victim, but he was not released. The
family also states that after the abduction Captain Atul
Sharma was shifted to a camp at Bomai, Sopore
A body identied to be that of the victim was exhumed
from the 22 RR camp on 6 July 2006 [on the site
allocated for the construction of a hospital]. The family
identied this body as being that of the victim based on
certain identiers. The family also provided their blood
and other samples to the Government on 29 July 2006
for the purposes of establishing the identity of the body
exhumed, but they are yet to get a conrmation that the
body was indeed that of the victim. Two months
subsequent to sending the samples, the brother of the
victim approached SSP, Baramulla, Muneer Khan and
DSP [Operations] Junaid who informed him that the
DNA testing report did not match the dead body with
the victim. The family of the victim also states that after
about one year of the abduction of the victim, the
Commanding Ofcer [said to be an uncle of Captain
Atul Sharma] of an army camp at Sopore sought to
compromise with the family of the victim for a sum of
Rs. 2,50,000. The brother of the victim also says that
he was harassed and a false case of possession of
arms and ammunitions was almost placed on him, but
due to the intervention of certain higher authorities, he
was able to escape being falsely implicated.
The family of the victim gave a statement to the IPTK
on 29 December 2011.
FIR no. 224/2003 u/s 364 [Kidnapping/Abducting to
murder] Ranbir Penal Code, 1989 [RPC] was led at
100
the Baramulla Police Station .
100 Information on this FIR was sought through the Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2009 [RTI] on 7 October 2011. By
communication dated 22 May 2012 from the Jammu and Kashmir Police a copy of the FIR was provided. Further information sought
through RTI on 15 October 2013. Further information sought through RTI dated 14 November 2014.