INDIA: Uttar Pradesh police stocks cartridges to murder an innocent man 

INDIA: Police brutality, torture, lack of action by the National Human Rights Commission and failure of rule of law
———————————————————————

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from a local human rights organisation PVCHR based in Uttar Pradesh, Varanasi that an innocent man is under continuous threat from the local police and that the police officers have even threatened him that they have reserved a cartridge to shoot him when situations are favourable.

The AHRC is informed that the victim Mr. Ram Prasad Bharati, a resident of Chandauli District, Uttar Pradesh is under continuous threat from the police officers from Naugarh and Chakia. It is alleged that Mr. A. K. Singh and Mr. Ramawadh Yadav, both police officers attached with Majhgavan police station, is alleged to have taken the victim into custody from his house on 15 September 2005 and detained the victim at Majhgavan police station for a few hours on the pretext of investigating into alleged Naxilite activities in the area. It is alleged that while the victim was in custody the arresting officers as well as senior police officers including the Superintend of Police from Chandauli have threatened the victim that he would be soon murdered in a fake encounter killing.

It is also alleged that on 6 February 2005 Mr. A. K. Singh had paid a visit to the victim’s house looking for the victim and when he found that the victim was not at home, he asked the victim’s sons to inform the victim that the officer has kept ‘a cartridge’ in reserve to be used against the victim in near future. The AHRC is informed that the victim Mr. Ram Prasad even though had approached the local courts and the National Human Rights Commission, the authorities has failed to intervene in the case. The victim as well as his family as of now is living in extreme trauma due to continuous threat and intimidation and lack of support from any government agents. The situation is grave since it is the very police who are responsible to respect and protect the life of the citizen is the threat in this case. Contextually, it is also brought to your notice that encounter killing is the common ruse posed by the law enforcement agencies in India for extra judicial killing.

The AHRC condemns the act of the state police and the stale attitude of the authorities in India which has failed to intervene in this case despite various complaints. We request you to immediately intervene in this case calling for immediate protection to the victim and also asking for an independent inquiry into the case by the Indian authorities.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission
————————————————————-

DETAILED INFORMATION:

Name and address of the victim: Mr. Ram Prasad Bharati, son of Mr. Badlu Ram, residing at Vishasharpur, Naugarh police station, Chandauli District, Uttar Pradesh, India
Date and time of incident: Continuously since 2003
Place of incident: Chandauli District, Uttar Pradesh, India
Alleged perpetrators: Mr. A. K. Singh, Mr. Ramawadh Yadav and other police officers from Naugarh police station and Superintend of Police Chandauli, Chandauli District, Uttar Pradesh, India

Case details:

Mr. Ram Prasad Bharati, is a resident of Vishasharpur under the jurisdiction of Naugarh police station in Uttar Pradesh, India. Since 2003 he is been chased by the police officers from Naugarh police station for unknown reasons. It is suspected that the police suspect him for alleged involvement for Naxilite activities which is prohibited by law in India. It is equally suspected that the police want to put pressure upon Prasad to work as an informer to the police. In either case, the way the police is dealing with Prasad is in the most inhuman way.

The intervention by the local police into Prasad’s life started in 2003. It started with occasional house visits by the police looking for Prasad, which took a brutal turn in early 2005. On 6 February 2005 Mr. A. K. Singh visited Prasad’s house and asked for Prasad. Prasad’s sons who were at home informed the police officer that their father was not at home and further informed the officer that their father had gone to Varanasi to meet his brother. The police officer hearing this shouted at Prasad’s children and informed them that he had kept a cartridge for their father and that soon he will be registering a case against the entire family and would bring them all to the police station.

On 15 September 2005 the same police officer along with a colleague Mr. Ramawadh Yadav again came to Prasad’s house, but this time with additional police force. They took Prasad into custody by about 6 am and then took him to Majhgavan police station. Form there Prasad was taken to Naugarh police station where he was brutally tortured. After some time the Circle Inspector of Police from Chakiya Police Circle along with Station Officer from Naugarh police station, Station in Charge of Majhgavan police station, Superintend of Police from Chandauli and Station Officer Chakarghatta Mr. Umesh Pandey arrived at the police station. In the presence of these senior police officers Prasad was beaten up. While beating up Prasad, the officers were also abusing Prasad with the most filthy language referring to his caste. Prasad comes from the Dalith community and is also a supporter of the local political party, the Bahujan Samajwadi Party. While the abuse was going on the Superintend of Police from Chandauli was shouting at Prasad that next time they would take him to a nearby forest and shoot him and later claim that Prasad was involved with Naxalite activities and had been shot dead in a police encounter. In the mean while coming to know about Prasad’s arrest some of the members of the Bahujan Samajwadi Party also collected in front of the police station. Seeing the crowd increasing in number the police released Prasad by about 10 pm without registering any case.

Annoyed, threatened and fearing for his life Prasad approached the local Magistrate Court on 28 November 2005 asking for help. Prasad moved the Judicial Magistrate Court Chakia requesting the court to inquire into the matter and requesting the court to call for a report from the local police and to find out for what offence and what charge he is been inquired into. In response to the inquiry from the court the Naugarh police submitted in court that Prasad is not wanted in any case. However, the police further submitted that Prasad is a notorious criminal and that he is under surveillance for alleged Naxilite activities. It is to be noted here that if a person is facing no criminal charges or in the absence of any previous convictions there is no law in India which could declare a person a criminal. The procedure is, if a person is to be proclaimed as a offender and if the person’s name is to be included in the ‘wanted list’ either the person must be absconding avoiding arrest pending an arrest warrant or the person after arrest must be brought before the Magistrate where in a quasi judicial process, the Magistrate, after hearing both the police and the detainee either declares the person as a proclaimed criminal or dismiss the claim by the police. In Prasad’s case nothing of this nature had ever happened. However, to Prasad’s surprise the local magistrate accepted the police report into file, but failed to take any action in the case even though the law mandates that the court cannot ignore such reports from the police where a person is arbitrarily declared as a proclaimed offender by the police.

Finding that the local court is failing to help Prasad, he filed a complaint with the National Human Rights Commission on 20 July 2005 with the help of PVCHR. The National Human Rights Commission accepted the complaint into file and through its order dated 25 July 2005 asked the State Police to inquire into the matter and to ‘take appropriate action’, which in itself mean nothing since the complaint by Prasad is against the state police. In the meanwhile on 16 October 2005 an officer from the Special Task Force to Investigate Naxilite Activities (STF) Mr. Amresh Tripadi visited Prasad’s house and gave in writing that there are no cases pending with his office as against Prasad and that he was giving this in writing because he wanted to avoid anyone at a later stage claiming that it was his office which shot Prasad in an encounter.

These incidents have caused extreme trauma for Prasad and his family. It is known that in India people are killed by law enforcing agencies on the pretext of encounter killing. Prasad comes from a Dalith community and he is very vocal against the atrocities committed against the Daliths. It is also alleged that the Intelligence Bureau (IB), the Central Intelligence Agency in India is also behind these incidents since they wanted to use Prasad as an informant with the support of the local police. In either case Prasad and his family as on today live without the minimum guarantee that whether Prasad would live another day. Prasad in follow-up of his complaint with the National Human Rights Commission has also written to all government agencies responsible for policing in India and in Uttar Pradesh in particular. None of these complaints yielded any result. Prasad is the only earning member of his family.

This is not a stay case where the local police impart terror into ordinary people in India by forcing them to become informers or falsely implicate them with serious charges. The AHRC has come to know a few hundred cases in the recent past where the police officers in India impart brutal torture upon innocent persons. The AHRC is also aware that in many cases people were killed by the police on fake encounter killings. The AHRC has intervened in all these cases where the AHRC has brought these cases into the attention of the Government of India and also to various organs of the UN. This is also a case which exposes the fallibility of the domestic legal system in India. In India as on today there is no specific law which provides protection to ordinary people against torture and police violence. There is no independent agency in India to inquire into such cases. The only option available as on today is to entrust the police to investigate allegations of torture against police which has proved meaningless since often these inquiring officers are influenced by their colleagues who are facing the charges or the officers themselves are facing similar charges. As in this case the domestic courts have proved that either it is unconcerned against cases of custodial torture or it subscribe to the acts of the police.

In Asia India is one of the countries with a very poor human rights standard. Even in poorer countries like Sri Lanka there are existing domestic laws which cater to the requirements of the International Convention against Torture. Sri Lanka is way ahead, in ratifying the convention and also to have a domestic legislation criminalizing torture.  As on today custodial torture is a crime in Sri Lanka which attracts an imprisonment for a period of seven years and the case is traible at a High Court. There are also separate and independent mechanisms to inquire into cases of alleged torture working under the Attorney General’s Department. In India however, torture is not made a crime and on the contrary if one need to prosecute a case of torture the complainant need to depend upon the very same police who is responsible for torture as it is depicted in this case. This has lead to numerous instances where cases were not investigated and the victims facing brutal reparations.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the authorities listed below expressing your concerns over this case asking them to intervene in this case. The entire incident must be investigated into and the erring officers must be punished. The victim must be given immediate protection. If it is proved that the victim has suffered physical injuries the state as well as the perpetrator police officers must be made to pay compensation to the victim.

 

 

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