INDIA: Suspected case of trafficking of a woman and a potential police cover-up 

INDIA: Disappearance; Potential police cover-up; Police failure to properly investigate; failure of West Bengal Human Rights Commission to properly assess police investigations and report.
———————————————————————
Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from MASUM, a human rights organisation in West Bengal, regarding the possible trafficking of a woman and a potential police cover-up during the investigations into her disappearance. Purnima Das, worked as a nurse at the National Homoeo Hall at the Kantul Village, Dadpur Police Station, Hooghly District, where Dr. Jamaluddin was in charge. (National Homoeo Hall has no licence to run this type of business, and Dr. Jamaluddin is a self-claimed doctor having no degree, diploma or licence). Purnima went missing on 21 March 1999 from the said clinic, and has not been seen since. Her mother, Mrs. Jyotsna Das, has since gone to great lengths to reveal the truth behind her daughter’s disappearance. She is of the belief that Purnima was forced into trafficking by persons linked to the clinic and that the police have conducted their investigations in a way to suggest that a cover-up may have taken place.

Despite two complaints having been lodged with the police, the case having been taken before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chuchura Court, and an official report having been conducted by the Criminal Investigation Department for the West Bengal Human Rights Commission, Purnima’s whereabouts remain unknown and those accused of her disappearance remain at large.

In light of this, we ask that you intervene in this case. Please write to the relevant authorities listed below demanding that a proper investigation be conducted into this case. Investigations should be conducted independently so as to ensure impartiality. If sufficient evidence can be found against the accused, then they must be brought before a court of law to answer questions into Purnima’s disappearance. An investigation should also be carried out into the conduct of the Dadpur Police, and disciplinary action taken against any personnel found negligent in their duty.

Urgent Appeals Desk
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
————————————————————-

DETAILED INFORMATION:

Name of the Victim:
Miss Purnima Das, 21, daughter of Sri Radhanath Das of Balir Morh Kalitala Village, Chunchura Police Station Hooghly District, West Bengal, India.
Name of the Perpetrators:
1. Dr. Jamaluddin, son of S. K. Hirulal of the National Homoeo Hall, at Kantul Village, Dadpur Police Station, Hooghly District, West Bengal.
2. Smt. Laxmi Maity, wife of late Haren Maity of Kachua Morh Village, Moydapara, Dadpur Police Station, Hooghly District, West Bengal.
3. Shri Sadhan Ruidas, son of late Kalipada Ruidas of Satithan Ruidas Para Village, Dadpur Police Station, Hooghly District, West Bengal.
4. Shri Samar Datta, Officer-in-Charge, Dadpur Police Station (at present Traffic Sadar – Investigating Officer)
5. Shri Dipendu Sarkar, District Enforcement Branch, Hooghly
6. Shri R K Bhattacherjee District Enforcement Branch Inspector (H), District Enforcement Branch office, Hooghly, Investigative Officer
Date of Incident: 21 March 1999
Place of Incident: National Homoeo Hall at village – Kantul, Police Station Dadpur, District – Hooghly.
Current status of case: MASUM received a complaint from Mrs Jyotsna Das whose eldest daughter Ms. Purnima Das has been missing since 1999, having last been seen at her workplace. She has become frustrated with this legal battle, which she is fighting alone. She has contacted every State Administrative Machinery, as well as the Human Rights Commission, but her tireless efforts have yielded no result.

Case details:

Purnima Das, worked as a nurse at the National Homoeo Hall at the Kantul Village, Dadpur Police Station, Hooghly District, where Dr. Jamaluddin was in charge. (National Homoeo Hall has no licence to run this type of business, and Dr. Jamaluddin is a self-claimed doctor having no degree, diploma or licence).  Purnima went missing on 21 March 1999 from the said clinic, and has not been seen since. Her mother, Mrs. Jyotsna Das, has since gone to great lengths to reveal the truth behind her daughter’s disappearance. She is of the belief that Purnima was forced into trafficking by persons linked to the clinic and that the police have conducted their investigations in a way to suggest that a cover-up may have taken place.

Prior to joining the clinic, Purnima befriended a woman named Laxmi Maity, who was attached to the clinic as a fourth grade employee. When Laxmi became aware of Purnima’s family financial difficulties, she promised Purnima that she would procure a job for her. Soon after, Laxmi informed Purnima that she had secured her a job at Dr. Jamaluddin’s clinic and would start on 31 January 1999.

On 21 March 1999, Purnima went to the clinic to do a shift, and was not seen again. After Purnima did not return home for several days, her mother, Mrs Jyotsna Das, went to the clinic to ask into her daughter’s whereabouts. Upon arriving at the clinic and explaining to Dr. Jamaluddin that she had not seen her daughter for several days, the doctor informed Jyotsna that Purnima had run off with her lover and intended to marry him. The doctor assured Jyotsna however, that Purnima would return soon.  Jyotsna was most surprised by this development, as she had no idea that her daughter was contemplating marriage.

Some time later, Laxmi Maity went to Purnima’s house and met with Jyotsna and assured her that she, with the help of Sadhan Ruidas, the compounder and Dr. Jamaluddin, would get her daughter back. She also advised Jyotsna not to contact the police, as this would not be good for the family’s reputation, and because she said that Purnima would return in a few days. For this reason, Purnima’s family did not contact the police. In April 1999, while still awaiting news of her daughter’s whereabouts, Jyotsna was informed by Sadhan and Laxmi that Purnima had already married and was happy with her new husband and new life.

Upon hearing this news and suspicious of its details, on 20 April 1999 Jyotsna lodged a complaint with the Dadpur Police Station (General Diary Entry No. 742). Thereafter she again filed another complaint with the Chuchura Police Sation (General Diary Entry No. 1699) on April 27. Her efforts were in vain however, as the police did not act. With no other alternative, Jyotsna moved her case to the criminal court on 30 August 1999. Under the Chief Judicial Magistrate, at the Chuchura Court, a criminal case was started against Dr. Jamaluddin, Sadhan Ruidas and Laxmi Maity under sections 363/366/375/120B of the Indian Penal Code (Dadpur Police Station case no. 78 – 22 October 1999).  The police, however, conducted improper investigations into the case, in that they failed to conduct full and thorough inquiries. Though the investigating police submitted a Charge Sheet against the accused persons, the criminal case of which is still pending in the court of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chinchura, Hooghly, West Bengal, little has come of this case.

As the whereabouts of Purnima still remained unknown, Jyotsna, on 17 August 1999, took her case to the West Bengal Human Rights Commission (WBHRC) – case docket no. 2078. The WBHRC directed the Central Investigation Department (C.I.D.) to conduct an investigation into this case and report on its findings. The Deputy Registrar of the West Bengal Human Rights Commission informed the complainant (via memo no. 9080(1)/WBHRC/com/132/99-2000) on 17 February 2000, that the Commission was fully satisfied with the report submitted by the Deputy Inspector General, of the C.I.D, West Bengal confirming that Purnima had fled with some youths on a motor cycle on 22 March 1999. But this response did not satisfy Jyotsna who again requested the C.I.D. to start a fresh inquiry against Dr. Jamaluddin and the other co-accused.

MASUM believes that there is a high possibility that this case involves the existence of a nexus between the perpetrators and state police. The police, while conducting investigations, did not carry out their duty to the best of their ability and never once contemplated the possibility that this case might involve the issue of trafficking. Furthermore, the report submitted by the C.I.D. to the Human Rights Commission was not based on police intelligence, but rather, on assumptions and opinions.

The clinic, where Purnima sought her appointment as a nurse, was not a legal health centre and was mainly meant for abortion. The police, however, in their report did not report this and nor did they seek the clinic’s closure, given the illegality of it.

Though the accused persons were charged and remanded in custody for few days before being granted bail, no further action was taken against them. Such conduct by the police demonstrates a common pattern whereby if the police wish to protect perpetrators, they simply register a complaint against the accused, but conduct investigations in such a way that guilt cannot be proven. This way, no one can say that the police did not register the complaint or start a case against the accused persons.

Mr. Samar Datta, the Officer-in-Charge at the Dadpur Police Station, who investigated this case, also lacks a clear working record.  AHRC has issued UAs and statements on the forced disappearance of Bhikari Paswan, where Samar Dutta is the primary accused.  It is worth noting that it is he who picked up Bhikari Paswan in 1993, whose whereabouts still remain unknown. His case has recently been heard at the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, Geneva (E/CN.4/2005/NGO/107) dated 15 February 2005. The denial of rights to citizens of West Bengal have become a common trait in Mr Datta’s work.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send a letter to the following relevant authorities voicing your concern regarding this case.

 

 

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