STRUCTURES OF VIOLENCE

486 | Structures of Violence
The family of the victim gave the above statement to
the IPTK.
The statement provides credible and important
evidence against the main alleged perpetrator Abdul
Rashid Pahloo. Alleged perpetrator no.2 is also
indicted by the statement. Further investigations are
warranted. The status of the present FIR needs to be
ascertained.
Case No. 3
Victim Details
[Name and identifying information withheld] [Torture
and Sexual Assault]
Spouse: [Name withheld]
Resident of: Islamabad District
Alleged Perpetrators
1. Subedar Rattan Singh, Junior Commissioner
Ofcer [JCO], 2 Rashtriya Ries [2 RR], Army
2. Lance Naik [Lance Corporal] Pretam Singh, 2
Rashtriya Ries [2 RR], Army
3. Lance Naik [Lance Corporal] Karan Singh, 2
Rashtriya Ries [2 RR], Army
Case Information
First Information Report [FIR] no.29/1994 u/s 307
[Attempt to murder], 354 [Assault/Criminal force to a
woman with intent to outrage modesty], 342
[Wrongfully conning person] Ranbir Penal Code,
1989 [RPC] was led at the Anantnag Police Station on
1
27 January 1994 .
By communication dated 19 May 2012 from the
Jammu and Kashmir Police information was provided
that a chargesheet was submitted and casele sent for
sanction for prosecution under the Armed Forces
(Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990
[AFSPA]. A copy of the FIR was provided on 21 May
2012. By further communication dated 9 July 2012
from the Jammu and Kashmir Police, in addition to restating
the information already provided, it was stated
that while sanction for prosecution had been sought,
no response had been received. By communication
dated 16 November 2013 this position was re-stated.
By communication dated 16 May 2014 from the
Jammu and Kashmir Police information was provided
that “The investigation of the case has been closed as
challaned and case le along with relevant records
and evidence both oral and documentary stands
submitted to GOI for accord of sanction and the same
lies with the concerned sanctioning authority”. By
communication dated 18 December 2014 from the
Jammu and Kashmir Police, it was stated that
enclosed was a copy of letter under which the CD le
had been sent for government sanction. Enclosed is
communication dated 19 August 2003 from Senior
Superintendent of Police [SSP], Anantnag, to Deputy
Inspector General [DIG], South Kashmir. The
communication encloses translated documents and
statements of witnesses and seeks that sanction to be
sought.
The FIR states that on 26 January 1994 personnel of
the 2 RR came to the Village Sipan. In the afternoon of
27 January 1994 the 2 RR personnel left but forgot one
of their weapons at the village in front of the house of
the victim. Three unidentied persons came and took
the weapon. The husband of the victim asked them not
to do so because it belonged to the army. The husband
of the victim was taken away by the unidentied
persons. Then ve army persons of the 2 RR, including
a Sikh returned, and tortured the victim in the house of
Gul Sheikh, s/o Ramzan Sheikh. They inserted chillies
in her vagina and she felt terrible pain. She was then
taken to the Police Line Anantnag where she was
medically examined and her statement recorded.
The Ministry of Defence, in its afdavit before the High
Court of Jammu and Kashmir in 2009 on sanctions for
prosecution under AFSPA, stated in relation to this
case that it was not received.
The Government of Jammu and Kashmir, in response
to information sought through the Jammu and Kashmir
Right to Information Act, 2009 [RTI] on sanctions for
prosecution under AFSPA, stated on 6 September
2011 in relation to this case that sanction was sought
from the Ministry of Defence on 8 September 2006 and
was awaited.
It is noteworthy that it took the Jammu and Kashmir
Police and Government of Jammu and Kashmir 12
years to investigate and process the case for acquiring
sanction for prosecution under AFSPA which
apparently helped the perpetrators in evading justice.
Further, the slowness of the process is evident from
the fact that it took three years – 2003 to 2006 - for the
sanction le to pass from the DIG, South Kashmir, to
the time the Government of Jammu and Kashmir sent
the le to Ministry of Defence.
It needs to be ascertained whether the Jammu and
Kashmir Government has at all sent the case for
sanction for prosecution to the Ministry of Defence and
whether the Ministry of Defence has misplaced the
case le. Atleast after the 2009 afdavit by the Ministry
of Defence, the Jammu and Kashmir Government
should have considered even re-sending the case or
clarifying when and how the case was sent.
In any case, after providing this information before the
High Court of Jammu and Kashmir in 2009 and also in
1994 after the case was led against the personnel of
the army the Ministry of Defence seems to have cared
1 Information on this FIR was sought through the Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2009 [RTI] on 7 October 2011. Further
information sought through RTI on 15 October 2013. Further information sought through RTI dated 14 November 2014.