04.10.2015 Views

STRUCTURES OF VIOLENCE

4cONo1kTN

4cONo1kTN

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

447| Structures of Violence<br />

victim and purportedly bearing his thumb print. This<br />

was done to create the impression that the victim was<br />

alive.<br />

The preliminary investigations in this case suggest<br />

that other people could have been killed in a similar<br />

manner for awards and other incentives and buried<br />

into unmarked, unidentied graves in Jammu and<br />

Kashmir.<br />

Of particular signicance in the case of alleged<br />

perpetrator Hans Raj Parihar is that he was implicated<br />

in other cases, which are referred to in this report, and<br />

yet he received, as per publicly available information,<br />

the Director General of Police's Commendation<br />

Medal for 2001.<br />

Case No. 170<br />

Victim Details<br />

Identity not ascertained [Extra-Judicial Killing]<br />

Alleged Perpetrators<br />

1. Colonel Joneja, 49 Rashtriya Ries [RR],<br />

Army<br />

Case Information<br />

The Ministry of Defence, in response to information<br />

sought through the Jammu and Kashmir Right to<br />

Information Act, 2009 [RTI] on sanctions for<br />

prosecution under the Armed Forces (Jammu and<br />

Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990 [AFSPA], stated<br />

on 10 January 2012 that on 17 December 2006 there<br />

was a killing by shooting.<br />

First Information Report [FIR] no.131/2006 was led.<br />

Sanction for prosecution was declined on 8 March<br />

2011. Further, it was stated that: “no ofcer by the<br />

name of Colonel Joneja was ever borne on the<br />

strength of 49 Rashtriya Ries. Therefore, question of<br />

involvement of Colonel Joneja in the case does not<br />

arise”.<br />

The Jammu and Police investigations in the case are<br />

not with the IPTK and therefore the decline of sanction<br />

for prosecution under AFSPA cannot be appropriately<br />

analyzed. No proof is provided by the Ministry of<br />

Defence for its reason for decline of sanction for<br />

prosecution.<br />

It is noteworthy that it took the Jammu and Kashmir<br />

Police and Government of Jammu and Kashmir ve<br />

years to investigate and process the case for<br />

acquiring sanction for prosecution under AFSPA<br />

which apparently helped the perpetrators in evading<br />

justice. Further, the available documents do not<br />

suggest that even a Court-Martial was conducted in<br />

this case by the army.<br />

Case No. 171<br />

Victim Details<br />

Showkat Ali Mughal [Abduction, Torture and Extra-<br />

Judicial Killing (Custodial Killing)]<br />

Son of: Haji Mohammad Lateef Mughal<br />

Resident of: Chaprian, Rajouri District<br />

Alleged Perpetrators<br />

1. Showkat Ali Malik, Station House Ofcer<br />

[SHO], Rajouri Police Station, Jammu and<br />

Kashmir Police<br />

2. Gyan Singh, Investigating Ofcer, Rajouri<br />

Police Station, Jammu and Kashmir Police<br />

3. Constable Mohammad Razak, Jammu and<br />

Kashmir Police<br />

4. Tasaduk Hussain, Jammu and Kashmir<br />

Police<br />

Case Information<br />

Showkat Ali Mughal was killed in custody by the<br />

alleged perpetrators. Showkat Ali Mughal was<br />

arrested from his house on 13 February 2007 in<br />

connection with some theft and during torture he<br />

collapsed and was taken to the District Hospital<br />

Rajouri where he was declared dead.<br />

An enquiry was conducted by K.K.Sharma, Additional<br />

District Magistrate, Rajouri. It was concluded that<br />

Showkat Ali Mughal had died due to a cardiac arrest<br />

attributed to fear and exposure to severe cold.<br />

The family of Showkat Ali Mughal approached the<br />

State Human Rights Commission [SHRC] on 19<br />

February 2007 and a nal decision was delivered on 9<br />

July 2008. Rs.2,00,000 ex-gratia government relief<br />

was recommended.<br />

The SHRC arrived at its decision by considering<br />

reports from the police.<br />

The SHRC rst considered the report of the Deputy<br />

Inspector General of Police [DIG], Rajouri / Poonch<br />

Range which based its conclusions on the report of<br />

the Additional District Magistrate, Rajouri.<br />

Also considered was the enquiry report by the<br />

Inspector General of Police [IGP], Jammu Zone that<br />

reported that the person in custody was confronted<br />

with evidence gathered by the police and he must<br />

have been frightened of the consequences which<br />

caused his cardiac arrest resulting in death. It further<br />

also stated that death is not attributed to torture.<br />

The report of the Additional District Magistrate,<br />

Rajouri refers to the testimony of the following<br />

witnesses: Sakeena, mother of the victim,<br />

Mohammad Rashid, Abdul Khaliq, Khadam Hussain

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!