Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 392 (GAU)

Achang Pong v. Union of India

2002-09-11

AFTAB H.SAIKIA

body2002
A.H. SAIKIA, J.— Heard Mr B.N. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr K. Meruno, learned sr. C.G.S.C. for the Union of lndia. 2. This is an another case of custodial death. Late Mapuwati left Mokokchung from his Yisamyong residence on 3.1.96 for Dimapur and stayed in the house of his brother-in-law Sri C. Tinuat Dimapur. On 6.1.96 the deceased went to the house of one Dr. Moaliba, Dy Director of Veterinary and Animal Husbandry, Nagaland, who belonged to his same village and known to him, at Burma Camp, Dimapur, in search of a Kabiraj. There only this illfated incident happened. Army personnel of 3rd Corps from Rangapahar (Dimapur) swooped on the house of Dr. Moaliba wherefrom the deceased was taken into custody by the Army personnel along with all other male members in the house. Nothing was known thereafter about those persons including late Mapuwati who was under Army custody. Only on 9.1.96 the dead body of Mapuwati was handed over to the Dimapur Police Station at about 5 p.m. by Lt. Satpal Singh with marks of bullets injuries, business and piercing wounds etc. An FIR was also filed by the said Lt Satpal Singh from Army 3 Corps with- the Dimapur East Police Station which registered a case being Dimapur East P.S. No. 7/1996. 3. The petitioner who experienced such ghastly act of killing of his father in his tender age of 14 years and lost his father as a result of this tragic incident, has approached this Court on attaining majority of 18 years to ventilate his such grievances against the uncivilized action displayed by 3rd Corps Army personnel with a prayer to compensate him adequately. 4. This Court by order dated 14.9.2000, on being satisfied prima-facie ordered for an enquiry to be conducted by the country's highest Investigation Agency i.e. Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.) and consequently the S.P. C.B.I, at Silchar was directed to cause an enquiry into the allegations made in the writ petition as well as denial of the said allegations in the affidavit filed for and on behalf of the respondent No. 3 within a time frame of four months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order dated 14.9.2000. 5. Pursuant to such direction, the S.P., C.B.I., S.C.B., Kolkata conducted a thorough enquiry and placed a report dated 26.6.2002 before this Court. 5. Pursuant to such direction, the S.P., C.B.I., S.C.B., Kolkata conducted a thorough enquiry and placed a report dated 26.6.2002 before this Court. 6.1 have carefully perused the aforesaid C.B.I, report. On close scrutiny of the same it transpires that the allegations made in the writ petition found to be correct and true. The finding as appeared from the report may be noticed as follows:- "(a) that Sri Mapuwati Ao was picked by Army personnel in the morning of 6.1.96 from the residence of Dr. Moaliba Ao along with four other persons. (b) that the dead body of Mapuwati Ao having bullet injuries along with some arms and ammunition reportedly seized from militant hideouts was handed over to Dimapur East Police Station in the evening of 9.1.96. (c) that according to the version of the Army, Mapuwati Ao was killed due to cross firing between the Army and the militants near Chekiye village in the intervening night of 8th and 9th 1996. (d) that according to the expert's opinion death was caused due to bullet injuries inflicted from close range on the vital organs of the deceased. Other injuries on the body could have been caused by physical torture. (e) that no evidence came forth to prove that there was an encounter and cross firing between the Army and the militants near Chekive village. (f) that no evidence came forth to indicate Mapuwati Ao was taken by the Army to Chekiye village for recovery of arms and ammunition of militants. (g) that no independent evidence came forth to indicate that there was seizure of large quantities of arms and ammunition as claimed by the Army. (h) that the situation report of the Army records "own troops opened fire leading to the death of Mapuwati Ao". (i) that the Army authorities took a long time in handing over the dead body after the so-called counter. Surprisingly, they handed over the dead body to Dimapur East Police Station which is far away from Chekiye village rather than handing over the body to the nearby Diphuphar Police Station." 7. In view of the above findings of the C.B.I., this Court should not be detained to discuss and reiterate the settled law of the land in such cases of custodial death. In view of the above findings of the C.B.I., this Court should not be detained to discuss and reiterate the settled law of the land in such cases of custodial death. (If any authority is needed, reliance may be placed on 1) AIR 1993, SC-1960-Lilabati Behera- Vs-State of Orissa, 2) (1997) 1 SCC-416-D.K. Basu-Vs-State of West Bengal, 3) AIR 1997 SC-1203:1997 (II) GLT(SC) 22: Peoples Union of Civil Liberties-Vs-Union of India, 4) (1997)7 SCC-725-Postsangbam Ningol Thokchom (Smt) and another-Vs-General Officer, Commanding and others and 5) (1998)4 GLT- 333 - Zukheli Sema-Vs-Union of India and others) and straightaway is inclined to direct the Union respondents to pay monetary compensation. 8. Consequently, it is ordered that the respondents No. 1 and 3 shall pay an amount of Rs.3,00,000.00 (Rupees three lakhs) to the petitioner. It is made clear that the said amount be deposited to the Registry of this Court by Bank Draft within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order and on being receipt the Bank Draft carrying the above amount, the same be handed over/paid to the petitioner on proper identification. In the result this writ petition is allowed.