INDIA: Alleged torture of an innocent person by the Kerala state police 

Dear friends

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from our local partner in Kerala, India that an innocent man was taken into custody and brutally tortured in custody on 9 October 2006 at the Mannuthy police station in Thrissur district of Kerala state. The victim Mr. Wilson was brutally tortured at the police station under the direction of the District Superintindent of Police Mr. Chandran and the Ollur Circile Inspector of Police Mr. Ramachandran. It is alleged that the Circle Inspector was present at the police station while the victim was tortured to confess the crime and that he also assaulted the victim along with other police constables.

DETAILS OF THE CASE:

On 4 October 2006, the dead body of a ten year old boy Sai, who belongs to a group of gypsies camped in the outskirts of a rubber plantation in Mannuthy in Thrissur district, was found in the rubber plantation. The discovery of the body was reported to Mannuthy police station which has the jurisdiction over the place where the boy’s body was discovered.

The victim Mr. Wilson, a welder by profession resides near the rubber plantation mentioned forehead. He works in a local workshop in Mannuthy. Wilson used to go to the plantation to collect twigs for firewood. On 9 October at about 4pm, when Wilson was collecting firewood in the rubber plantation, he was summoned by a police constable along with three other police officers allegedly to ask a few questions regarding the boy’s death. All of them were on motorbikes and they asked Wilson whether he was aware of the discovery of the boy’s body in the plantation. Wilson said that he was aware of the incident. The police officers then asked him what he was doing in the plantation for which Wilson answered that he was gathering firewood and he used to do it every alternate day or whenever he had some time to spare. The police officers then asked him to leave the firewood he had collected at his house and to accompany them to the police station since they wanted to question him regarding the boy’s death. Wilson informed the police officers that even though he had nothing to do with the boy’s death he is willing to accompany the officers to the police station. Wilson was taken to the Mannuthy police station on the motorbike of one of the officers.

At the police station, the Sub Inspector of police was not present. However, the Circle Inspector of Police Mr. Ramachandran was occupying the Sub Inspector’s office. Ramachandran is stationed at Ollur Circle police station, which entertains jurisdiction over Mannuthy police station. Once at the police station, a police constable Mr. Raphy punched Wilson behind his neck. Wilson fell down and screamed with pain. Raphy punched Wilson shouting “son of a bitch why did you kill the boy?”. Wilson got up and said he did not do anything and he has nothing to do with the boy’s death. The Circle Inspector then ordered the constables to remove Wilson’s dress. The constables removed all the clothes Wilson was wearing. Wilson tried to protest since he was made naked in the police station in front of other police officers and the public who was present at the police station for various reasons.

Then the officers asked Wilson to hold his penis out for the officers to inspect his genitalia. The examination was done in public in front of the others present in the police station which was extremely humiliating. It is alleged that the officers examined Wilson’s genitalia since they suspected that the boy was sexually abused before the murder. Following the examination, police constable Mr. Ansar slapped Wilson on his face and asked him whether he is willing to confess that he was responsible for the boy’s murder. Wilson pleaded not guilty. Then another police constable Mr. Radhakrishnan started flicking on Wilson’s nose-tip asking him to confess the crime. Wilson refused and he continued pleading innocence. Then the Circle Inspector approached him and punched Wilson in his stomach and shouted at the officers to bring Wilson to an adjacent room.

The officers ordered Wilson to sit down in a chair and the officers surrounded him and started asking questions about his involvement in the boy’s murder. Wilson though was pleading innocence, he was asked to answer the officers each time they asked a question by turning his head to the officer who asked the question, without moving from his chair. Some officers were seated behind Wilson and were asking him questions from behind, for which Wilson had to turn his head without moving his body. The questioning continued for a few hours and finally the officers were convinced that Wilson was not responsible for the boy’s death. The officers let Wilson off but ordered that he must report at the police station everyday at 5pm. Fearing further detention and torture Wilson agreed. Accordingly Wilson would report at the police station at 5pm and will have to wait till 9pm for him to be allowed to sign a register kept at the station. On October 13, Wilson was asked that he need not report at the station anymore. However, it was later known that the actual accused is one of the gypsies who was later arrested and detained.

Wilson’s experience is not a unique case from India and is yet another example of how the police conduct criminal investigation in India. Criminal investigation in the local context means confession extracted by brutal torture. The government of India and its state governments deny that custodial torture is practiced in India. There is no means by which officers responsible for engaging in custodial torture could be punished in India. Recently when cases of custodial deaths were reported in an alarming number from Kerala, the state government took the initiative to constitute an inquiry commission led by a retired High Court Judge to inquire into cases of custodial violence reported from the state between 1 April 2006 and 16 August 2006.

The commission started functioning on 18 September 2006 and a public notice was issued by the commission dated 29 September 2006 published through local dailies on 7 October 2006 calling for reports and complaints to be submitted to the commission’s office at House number 34/978-A, Gouri, Edappilli, Anjamana Road, Kochi, Kerala, within ten days from the date of the notice. This late notice by the commission addressed to the general public literally means that anyone who wished to complain against the police must do so within a day or else the commission would not accept such complaints since they were not submitted within time.

The functioning of the commission is questionable since the public was informed about the address to which the communications and complaints were to be mailed through a backdated notice which left 24 hours for the victims to complain. The mandate of the commission will expire in three months starting from 18 September 2006. The AHRC views the constitution of the commission as a whitewash to cover-up the state of policing in the state. In spite of this the AHRC through its local partner has submitted 12 cases for the commission’s consideration.

Wilson is willing to lodge a complaint at the local magistrate’s court about the torture meted out against him. However, the existing law in India only provide for the magistrate to forward the complaint filed by Wilson to the same officer who has authorised the use of torture. In reasonably functioning jurisdictions such anomalies are overcome by appropriate legislations and mechanisms so that any atrocities committed by the law enforcement officers are investigated and the offenders punished. However, in India, the government is engaged in the game of filling holes with darkness and false statements on issues like custodial torture.

India has signed the United Nations International Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) but refused to ratify the convention fearing obligations to implement the convention at the domestic level. However, a recent statement by the government has made clear that the government is planning to ratify the convention soon. Even if the government ratifies the convention against torture, there must be effective implementation of the convention within the country for which considerable change in policing is required in addition to domestic legislations put in place.

India is a country where even the directives issued by the Supreme Court of India are openly negated in practice. One such example, applicable in this case, is the well known judgment in the D.K Basu case (SHRI D.K. BASU v State of West Bengal). In this case, decided in 1996, the Supreme Court of India has instructed the government to make sure that fair practices are followed while arresting and detaining a person and also while investigating a crime. These provisions were intended to bring down instances of custodial torture. However the implementation of the directives of the court is limited to posting a copy of the court’s directives in a remote corner of every police station. There has been not even the slightest decrease in the number of torture or atrocities committed by the police in India in the last decade. On the contrary, the number of such cases has increased to an alarming extent. The custodial deaths reported from Kerala and this case is yet another addition to this number.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please send a letter to the relevant authorities mentioned below urging for an immediate and thorough investigation into this case so that disciplinary actions are taken against the alleged perpetrators.

 

 

 

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