STRUCTURES OF VIOLENCE

460 | Structures of Violence
despite the more nuanced wording of the 7 April 2011
letter referred to above, clearly suggests that the death
of the victim was due to unnatural causes. The
references to abrasions and death caused by a blunt
force strongly point to this. Further, the SHRC decision
of 5 January 2011 may also be considered. The SHRC
decision refers to a report from the Director General of
Police [DGP], Jammu and Kashmir of 3 September
2009. This report states that:
- The victim had business dealings with another
car broker: Saiba resident of Nishat. The victim
owed Saiba Rs. 40,000.
- On the morning of 18 May 2009, Inspector
Khursheed Ahmed Wani called up the victim and
asked him to report at the SOG Camp, Shergari.
- The victim was taken inside the camp, while
his friends were made to wait outside.
- “After some time the deceased is believed to
have lost his consciousness and was reportedly
taken to Ramzaan Nursing Home, Gogjibagh
wherefrom he was referred to SMHS Hospital
Srinagar where he was pronounced brought
dead.”
- The victim was not involved in any subversive
activity.
The SHRC's investigating wing also conducted
investigations and submitted that “the torture of
deceased in cargo camp at Srinagar is a stark reality
and also the investigation conducted by SDPO
Shaheed Gunj Srinagar seems to be biased”. The
report dated 2 December 2010 states that statements
of the following close relatives of the victim were
recorded: Mohammad Sha Pampori, Abdul Qayoom
Khan, Abdul Majid Beigh, Imtiyaz Ahmad Bhat and
Mushtaq Ahmad Beigh. The witnesses stated that the
victim was a car broker and owed Rs. 40,000 to
another car broker named Hilal Ahmad Bhat, resident
of Brain, Nishat. On 18 May 2009 the victim was asked
by Inspector Khursheed Ahmed Wani to report at the
SOG Camp, Cargo. The victim went there along with
two friends: Mohammad Sultan Shagoo and Sameer
Ahmad Bakshi. The victim was taken inside whereas
the two friends waited outside. The victim remained
inside the camp for more than two hours and as he was
leaving the room of Inspector Khursheed Ahmed Wani
the victim fell down and lost his consciousness. The
witnesses also stated that there were multiple injuries
on the body of the victim. The witnesses stated that
Inspector Khursheed Ahmed Wani was a close relative
of Hilal Ahmad Bhat. The investigating wing also
recorded the statements of Dr. Ghulam Qadir Shah
and Dr. Mammer. Both Doctors conrmed the injuries
on the body of the victim. They also stated that the
“death was caused due to a grievous injury on the
head of the deceased”. They conrmed that the death
was caused by a blunt force. The Doctors also gave
their opinion that the victim had been tortured.
Inspector Khursheed Ahmed Wani was also given an
opportunity to produce evidence. Four witnesses were
produced. The witnesses conrmed that the victim
owed Rs. 40,000 to Hilal Ahmad.
Further, that Hilal Ahmad “led an application” before
the alleged perpetrator no.1, who then called the victim
and directed him to pay the amount. The victim, “while
leaving SOG Camp Cargo”, fell down and lost his
consciousness.
The investigating wing did not nd these version of
events credible. It was observed that these version of
events do not explain how the victim sustained injuries
on his shoulders, head, chest, and “intraparenchjymal
haemorrhage” of his kidneys. It was therefore
concluded that the victim had been brutally tortured in
custody. Further, that Hilal Ahmad should not have
approached Inspector Khursheed Ahmed Wani for
assistance. It was concluded therefore that Inspector
Khursheed Ahmed Wani was involved in the
commission of the crime.
The SHRC, based on the above, concluded as follows:
“There is no doubt that the investigation being
conducted by SDPO Shaheed Gunj is a protracted
with no intention to conclude the investigation, it will be
in the interest of delivery of justice, if the investigation
of the case is transferred to State Crime Branch for fair
and transparent investigation, as the Inspector
Khursheed Ahmad has exceeded his powers in
summoning the deceased Manzoor Ahmad Beigh in
Cargo camp at Srinagar in settling the matter of a civil
nature.”
The SHRC decision, similar to the Additional District
Development Commissioner, Srinagar inquiry,
appears to limit the culpability of Inspector Khursheed
Ahmed Wani, despite the unequivocal conclusions of
its investigating wing. Considering that it is established
that the victim was called by Inspector Khursheed
Ahmed Wani to the camp, was seen entering the
camp, was declared dead on reaching the hospital,
and appeared to have been killed by a “blunt force”, the
culpability of the alleged perpetrator no.1 should have
been concluded to have been for murder.
Nonetheless, despite the apparent slow and faulty
investigations being conducted by the police
authorities, the available documents appear to
strongly point to the guilt of Inspector Khursheed
Ahmed Wani. In light of this, the 26 April 2012 decision
of the Special Mobile Magistrate, PT&E Srinagar,
based it would appear on statements by doctors, is
highly questionable. It would appear that the “doctors”
had provided contradictory statements during the
police investigations under Section 164-A [Evidence of
material witnesses to be recorded by Magistrate in
certain cases] Criminal Procedure Code, 1989
(CrPC).
Finally, the Additional District Development
Commissioner, Srinagar report of 25 May 2009 may
also be considered. The conclusions were based on
statements of witnesses, relevant portions of relevant
witnesses are summarized below: