INDIA: Local police assault an innocent person; force him to carry human excreta and register a false case against him 

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information regarding the assault of an innocent person by the local police from Maleshwaramangalam, Thrissur District, Kerala state, India. Mr. Mohanan, son of Chinna, residing at Anappara House, Maleshamangalam, Thiruvilwamala in Thrissur District, Kerala was assaulted by Sub Inspector of Police (SI) V. Hamsa, along with four other police constables (PCs), including PC Babu, from Pazayanoor police station, Thrissur District. After beating up Mr. Mohanan, the police officers threw him into a police jeep, where Mr. Mohanan lost consciousness due to the pain and urinated and defecated inside the police jeep.  The higher police officers of the district have admitted the incident and an inquiry into the case has been initiated. However, SI Hamsa has now allegedly registered a false case against Mr. Mohanan implicating him as a suspect in a case of theft. This has reportedly been done to justify why he and his team took Mr. Mohanan into custody and to put pressure upon Mr. Mohanan to withdraw his complaint.

At approximately 2 am on February 10, 2006, Mr. Mohanan was helping some workers who were drilling a bore well at Maleshamangalam. SI Hamsa, and several police constables, including PC Babu, came to the site. None of the officers were in uniform. SI Hamsa allegedly flashed his flashlight in Mr. Mohanan’s face. Without realizing that SI Hamsa is a police officer, Mr. Mohanan asked SI Hamsa who he was to be shining a light in his face. SI Hamsa reacted violently to this, by shouting at Mr. Mohanan and asked PC Babu to immobilize Mr. Mohanan from behind. Then SI Hamsa assaulted Mr. Mohanan. The other police constables all then joined in, beating him on his spine and all over his body.

Mr. Mohanan soon lost consciousness and was then thrown into the police jeep. The police constables got into the jeep and left with Mr. Mohanan. On the way they continued assaulting Mr. Mohanan, as a result of which he urinated and defecated in the jeep. SI Hamsa stopped the jeep and ordered Mr. Mohanan, who had regained consciousness, to clean the jeep. One of the PCs had also vomited inside the jeep as a result of the smell. Since there was nothing available in the jeep to clean the mess, Mr. Mohanan was told to look around for some waste paper or plantain leaf, but could not find any.  SI Hamsa then ordered the constables to force Mr. Mohanan to eat the mess inside the jeep. Mr. Mohanan pleaded with the police officers, who allowed him instead to clean the mess with his bare hands.

Once Mr. Mohanan had finished cleaning the jeep, he was allowed to go. Mr. Mohanan later filed a complaint with the Superintendent of Police, Palakkad District, describing the entire incident. On receipt of the complaint, the Superintendent of Police transferred SI Hamsa and PC Babu from Pazayanoor police station and ordered a departmental inquiry into the entire incident. However, before the transfer, SI Hamsa registered a false charge against Mr. Mohanan, alleging that he is suspected of involvement in a theft case.

In India, the police is notorious for assaulting innocent persons and there is no effective law to prevent custodial torture. Although there are various judgments of the Supreme Court and the High Courts of India condemning torture as the most inhuman act, India is yet to criminalize torture. The remedy available for anyone who alleges torture is to be sought through these courts, which take years to decide on cases. Cases are frequently not admitted into courts at the early stages of investigation because, ironically, the courts often hold that ‘the law needs to take its own course’.

In the absence of any independent mechanism to investigate cases of alleged custodial torture, the most common reaction by the authorities in India is to order a departmental inquiry into the case, as has happened here. The departmental inquiry is always conducted without giving an opportunity for the complainant/victim to be heard, whereas the officers under inquiry enjoy complete freedom to influence the inquiring officer. Such inquiring officers are often former superior officers of the alleged perpetrators, or may also be facing similar allegations of torture themselves, making a mockery of the entire inquiry procedure. Punishment for such offences under this system is often limited to a transfer, or in very rare cases, to an entry in the service records.

The victims are therefore left with no effective remedy against the brutal violations committed against them. However, the Government of India has thus far refused to ratify the Convention against Torture, which it has signed, on the ground that domestic mechanisms available in India are effective in preventing custodial torture. The AHRC has brought numerous cases of a similar nature to the attention of the Government of India and various other authorities, including the Human Rights Commissions in India. However, none of these cases have been taken up by the Indian authorities, in violation of the victims’ right to effective remedies.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the concerned local authorities listed below calling for a prompt and impartial investigation to be completed into the abuses committed against Mr. Mohanan. Please ask that all police officers found to have committed the alleged abuses be immediately expelled from the police force and prosecuted for their grave actions, and for the victim to receive adequate compensation for his suffering. Please also call for the fabricated case against Mr. Mohanan to be dropped immediately, in the absence of any valid legal charges against him.

 

 

To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER