INDIA: Police practices continue to erode the rule of law in Varanasi 

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information regarding human rights violations in Varanasi, India, at the hands of local police officers who act with complete impunity. In the latest series of incidents an innocent school student was brutally beaten, a man was tortured in police custody and another man was shot-dead by the police.

The following cases were reported to AHRC by Peoples’ Vigilance Committee for Human Rights (PVCHR), a local human rights organisation based in Varanasi:

Case No. 1

Name of victim: Mr. Pransu Bajpeyi, resident of S.7/3 Golghar, within the jurisdiction of Kachahari police station Cantonment; student of Commerce of Class XII at St. John’s School, Maruli, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh
Name of alleged perpetrator: Inspector of Police, Mr. Jagdamba Prasad Dwivedi from Manduvadih police station, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh
Date of incident:  6 April 2005
Place of incident: Gates of St. John’s School, Marauli, Varanasi under the jurisdiction of Manduvadih police station

On 6 April 2005, Pransu Bajpeyi, a student in class XII at St. John’s School, Marauli, was standing at the front gates of his school. Without warning Pransu was pulled by his hair and dragged to the ground by Police Inspector Jagdamba Prasad Dwivedi. The Inspector questioned Pransu as to why he was standing at the gate. Pransu answered that he was a student of the school and was waiting to enter. Upon hearing this, the Inspector severely beat Pransu.  Fellow police officers at the scene allegedly called on the Inspector to stop, but to no avail. Pransu was badly injured by the assault and sustained a fractured hand.

After the incident Pransu went to the Manduvadih police station and attempted to lodge a complaint but he was refused a hearing and no complaint was lodged. Pransu also sent a complaint to the Superintendent of Police in Varanasi. Despite this no action has been taken against the Inspector to date. Pransu is undergoing continued medical treatment for his injuries in Shiv Prasad Gupta Hospital, Varanasi.

This case highlights one of the many flaws in the existing law in India where if a person needs to complain about a police officer, particularly in torture cases, he has no alternative but to approach the very same police station where the alleged perpetrator is stationed. This situation regularly leads to the unwillingness or failure of the police to accept and lodge the complaint.

Case No. 2

Name of victim: Mr. Vijay, alias Chahetu Maurya, son of Vanilal, resident of Rampur village, under the jurisdiction of Ramnagar Police Station, Varanasi District, Uttar Pradesh
Name of alleged perpetrators: Police officers from the Ramnagar Police Station
Date of incident:  15 June 2005
Place of incident: Ramnagar police station, Varanasi District

On 15 June 2004 Mr. Vijay was brought before Mr. Prahlad Singh, the Judicial Magistrate in Varanasi. Though the police requested for remand custody of Mr. Vijay, the Magistrate refused any further custody and released him forthwith. The Magistrate, while examining Mr. Vijay noted injuries to his body and observed that he was produced in court in handcuffs which is against the directives of the Human Rights Commission. The order of the Magistrate, a copy of which was also ordered to be served upon the Senior Superintendent of Police Varanasi, is shown below:

In the court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Varanasi

Present: Mr. Prahlad Singh, Additional Civil Judge / 1st Class Judicial Magistrate

Today on 15-6-04 an accused named Mr. Vijay alias Chahetu Maurya son of Vanilal resident of Rampur village under the jurisdiction of Ramnagar police station Varanasi district, Uttar Pradesh was brought before me under police custody. I went through the medical report of the accused. Having observed the medical report I found that there are abrasions on his little finger of right hand of the accused and he has a wound in his right hand. Accused informed the court that he had been beaten by stick and there were injuries on his back. I made a close observation of the injuries of the accused and found that on right and left side of his back there were dark marks of injuries. No medical inspection was done of these injuries. It seems that police has beaten the accused. Demand is being made by the police to give the accused on police remand. There is no ground of remand. Accused was brought to the court handcuffed, which goes against the direction of human rights commission. Further custody of the accused is refused. Accused may be released at once unconditionally. A copy of this order may be given to Senior Superintend of Police Varanasi for his perusal and appropriate action.

(Signature)

Prahlad Singh
Additional Civil Judge
1st Class Judicial Magistrate
Varanasi

A copy of this order to be served to the Senior Superintend of Police, Varanasi

Dated this the 15th day of June 2004   

(Signature)

Prahlad Singh
Additional Civil Judge
1st Class Judicial Magistrate
Varanasi

This case illustrates the brutality continually employed by police officers against those in their custody and under their responsibility. The arbitrary detention and torture of the victim and the failure to provide medical aid demonstrate a blatant violation of the existing laws, in particular the Code of Criminal Procedure and further guidelines issued by various constitutional courts including the Supreme Court of India.  Despite the recording of the polices’ misconduct by Mr. Prahlad Singh, no action has been taken against the police officers involved. The lack of action by the superior officer also illustrates how the absence of specific laws prohibiting torture and criminalising torture perpetuates this heinous crime and thus effectively gives law enforcement agencies near impunity in cases of such nature.

Case No. 3

Name of victim: Mr. Rajesh Chauhan, son of Tullu Chauhan, resident of Aadhen village, under the jurisdiction of Cantonment police station, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh
Name of alleged perpetrators:
1. Mr. D. P. Shukla, Station House Officer, Cantonment police station, Varanasi District, Uttar Pradesh
2. Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Sub-Inspector of Police, Cantonment police station, Varanasi District, Uttar Pradesh
3. Mr. Nityanand Singh, in charge of Ordeli Bazar police outpost under Cantonment police station, Varanasi District, Uttar Pradesh
4. Mr. Gopalji Gupta, in charge of Kachahari police outpost under Cantonment police station, Varanasi District, Uttar Pradesh
5. Mr. Samarjeet Singh, in charge of Nadesar police outpost under Cantonment police station, Varanasi District, Uttar Pradesh
6. Mr. Aditya Kumar Singh, Station House Officer, Shivpur police station, Varanasi District, Uttar Pradesh
Date of incident: 23 and 24 April 2005
Place of incident: Kathirawn village, Varanasi District

Between 23 and 24 April 2005, Mr. Rajesh Chauhan was killed by police from the Cantonment police station.

Mr. Chauhan had gone to Kathirawn village, which is under the jurisdiction of Phoolpur police station, to take his cousin’s wife to his cousin’s home. A large number of police entered the village at night and took Mr. Chauhan into custody, after which they took him to an unknown location where they allegedly shot him.  The victim’s body was then left near Chandamari, one kilometre away from his home, where he was found in the morning by villagers. The parents of the victim, after being informed of their son’s murder, rushed to the site and identified the body. The victim had gun shots to the head and body however no blood was present at the site where the body was found.

The police, in the First Information Report (FIR) on 26 April 2005, alleged that the victim had been killed in an ‘encounter’ in which the victim fired on police and was killed by police officers acting in self-defence.

The prosecution has further alleged that Mr. Chauhan was responsible for kidnappings. The alleged witnesses who identified the body remain unnamed and have not been brought forward. No evidence has been produced to substantiate claims as to Mr. Chauhan’s involvement in any criminal activities.

The parents of the victim allege that their son was killed while in police custody. They further allege that their son was taken into custody on mere suspicion and since he was killed while in custody the police have framed a false case against him. The medical report in this case is yet to be made available to the parents.

The AHRC suspects foul play in this case since this is not the first time we have received information about suspected murders by the police presented as ‘encounter killings’ from Varanasi. It is important to note that encounter killings are a common pretext posed by law enforcement agencies in India for extra-judicial killings (see also to UA-003-2006) and that the fabrication of FIRs by the police is also not uncommon (see also UA-145-2005).

The cases above describe a pattern of police brutality imposed upon the people of Varanasi leading to a general breakdown in the rule of law where the ordinary person fears police officers and regards them as the source of criminality; not as enforcers of law, safety and public welfare. These cases also reaffirm the AHRC’s observation that India lacks adequate mechanisms that can prevent police brutality and torture. India must criminalise torture and as the first step in the process must ratify the International Convention against Torture and other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. India has signed the convention but failed to ratify it on the pretext that the existing domestic mechanism is equipped in preventing torture and similar violence committed by the law enforcement agencies. These cases, however, clearly demonstrate that it is not.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to Mr. Navneet Sikera, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi, Uttar Predash, India who is the senior police officer who is officially responsible for taking actions against the perpetrators in the above three cases expressing your concerns over the breakdown in the rule of law and the widespread police abuse perpetrated in Varanasi district, Uttar Pradesh.

Please also write to the other relevant authorities listed below.

 

 

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