UPDATE (India): Delaying tactics resorted to by the prosecution in Dr. Binayek Sen’s case

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is appealing to you to write once again to the authorities in India regarding the case of Dr. Binayek Sen who is currently detained at the Raipur prison in Chhattisgarh state. The AHRC is informed by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), of which Dr. Sen is the Vice President, that the Dr. Sen’s case is being intentionally delayed in the trial court.

UPDATED INFORMATOIN:

Dr. Binayek Sen is a medical doctor specialising in Pediatrics. Dr. Sen is a renowned doctor and a consultant of the state and central government on public health. Dr. Sen is practicing medicine in the remote villages of Chhattisgarh state.

Dr. Sen was arrested by the Chhattisgarh state police on March 14, 2007. The state police accused Dr. Sen that he is closely associated with the Naxalite movement in the state. Applications filed on behalf of Dr. Sen at the local courts were dismissed since they were opposed by the state police. Throughout the hearing of these applications the state government and the police asserted that they have gathered credible evidence against Dr. Sen connecting him with the Naxalite movement in that state. However they failed to produce anything. But the court dismissed the application for bail. For further information regarding Dr. Sen’s case please see:  UP-118-2007, UP-106-2007, UP-091-2007, UP-079-2007, FA-003-2007, FS-026-2007, AS-185-2007 and AL-024-2007.

Dr. Sen’s case is now pending trial before the Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Raipur, Chhattisgarh. The case was taken up for framing charges in Dr. Sen’s absence. The prosecution is also delaying the handing over of the complete set of evidence that it is depending upon to Dr. Sen or his lawyer. In India it is the right of the accused to be informed in advance about the evidence the prosecution is relying upon in a trial.

The court had fixed 3 October 2007 for the prosecution to file a reply to the application filed by Dr. Sen’s lawyer regarding an evidence which the prosecution was allegedly depending upon. The application filed by the defense lawyer was seeking the order of the court to produce of the analysis report of a computer hard drive that the police had allegedly gathered from Dr. Sen’s house. But, on 3 October, the prosecution informed the court that the same would be filed late in the afternoon. But, around 3:00pm on that day, the court was informed that they were seeking advice from the office of the Superintendent of Police, Raipur, and, therefore, asked for more time. The court fixed 8 October, 2007 for filing the reply or to provide the analysis report of the hard drive.

On October 8, the prosecution failed to file anything in court and sought more time. However, the court has given the prosecution a final chance to file a reply and/or to provide the report of the hard drive to the court and the accused. Given the holidays in between the date for arguments on the matter is now fixed on 22 October, 2007. The AHRC will update you regarding the further proceedings in the case.

On September 29, Dr. Binayek Sen and Mr. Piyush Guha, another accused in the case, were not produced in the court, although the Raipur Central Jail is hardly 300 meters away from the court. The Jail Superintendent, Raipur wrote to the judge expressing his inability to produce the accused in the court due to ‘security concerns’. Mr. Narayan Sanyal, another accused in the case, was however brought by the authorities from Bilaspur, some 125 kilometers away from the court.

In the absence of Dr. Sen during the proceedings of the case, a video conferencing was resorted to in the court. Even though video conferencing is possible, the procedure rules out the possibility for Dr. Sen and his lawyers to consult each other during the proceedings. Dr. Sen also feels uncomfortable about using video conferencing since he is of the view that when even simple things like telephone calls are denied to the accused in other cases, why he is treated special.

The AHRC will keep you informed about the further developments in the case. However in the meanwhile if you wish to receive any additional information, please contact:
Mr. Rajendra K Sail, President –PUCL Chhattisgarh State Chapter, Post Box No. 87
Main Post Office, Raipur – 492001, Chhattisgarh, INDIA Email: pucl.cg@gmail.com

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please send letters to the relevant authorities listed below, urging them to expedite the trial proceedings of Dr. Sen. The AHRC is writing a separate letter to the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary General on the situation of human rights defenders calling for an intervention in this case.

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