Skip to main content
Sabrang

Rule of Law

Sabrang

Deliberate attempt by Mangalore police to cover up excesses: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court questioned the accountability of the Mangalore police and granted bail to 21 people arrested in anti-CAA protests on December 19, 2019

20 Feb 2020

mangluru

The Karnataka High Court granted bail to 21 people arrested in Mangalore who were arrested for offences committed allegedly during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). While stating the judgement, the Court observed that there had been a deliberate attempt by the Mangalore police to cover up the excesses they committed against the ant-CAA protestors.

The order passed by Justice John Michael Cunha read, “… a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up the police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police. Overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that the FIRs are registered under Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder) against the persons killed by the police themselves.”

The judgement also stated, “The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to fabricate evidence and to deprive the petitioners of their liberties. Any criminal antecedents of the petitioners are not disputed. There is no direct evidence to connect the petitioners with the alleged offences. The investigation appears to be mala fide and partisan.”

The Karnataka High Court also took note of CCTV footage and photographs that pointed out that the crowd was unarmed, showing only one person who was holding a bottle. “On the other hand,” the court added, “photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd.”

The Court also reprimanded the police saying that though it had registered 31 FIRs (including being charged with being members of an unlawful assembly and armed with lethal weapons) against the protestors, not a single case had been registered based on complaints made by the families of those who were injured and those who died to the police firing.

Two people were allegedly shot dead and a third was injured by the Mangalore police during protests against the CAA on December 19, 2019. A fact-finding report that was published by human rights activists said that the police allegedly went on a rampage during the protests and stormed into shops in the vicinity, pulling out people, selectively attacking Muslims. At around 4 pm, a team of police attacked Ibrahim Khaleel mosque where about 80 persons were praying peacefully. The police apparently sought to chase certain youth into the said mosque and then initiated an indiscriminate attack upon the mosque. The police launched an attack of stones and tear gas through and above the slats of the mosque gate, causing havoc and confusion.

The report also stated that the police attacked the Highland Hospital where the bodies of the deceased were kept. It was reported that the police attacked the Highland Hospital demanding that the bodies be handed over to them as they were Medico Legal Cases (MLCs). The police upon arrival at the hospital were faced by an angry group of mourners, who pelted stones at the police outside the hospital. The police engaged in lathi charge outside the hospital. They did not stop there. The police then fired tear gas within the hospital compound and proceeded to storm the hospital. They tried to barge into patient rooms including the ICU.

It said that denying bail to the petitioners would be a travesty of justice and an act of sacrificing their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and the police.

Last week, the Karnataka High Court had also ruled that the prohibitory orders passed under Section 144 CrPC on December 18 in Bangalore were illegal. Slowly but steadily, the evidence of police brutalitiy and the confessions of the police about their attacks on those protesting the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) are coming to fore. With videos of the Delhi police attacking the students at Jamia Millia Islamia University and the UP police giving a ho-hum confession about their attacks on protestors in Bijnor, it is time for the Mangalore police to own up to its brutal actions.

The complete judgement of the Karnataka High Court may be read here.


Related:

Mangaluru: Fact-finding report unearths the reality of police brutality at anti-CAA protests
Fact-finding report reveals police brutality at Aurangabad and Phulwari Sharif
‘Bloody Sunday 2019’- PUDR releases report on Jamia police brutalities

 

Deliberate attempt by Mangalore police to cover up excesses: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court questioned the accountability of the Mangalore police and granted bail to 21 people arrested in anti-CAA protests on December 19, 2019

mangluru

The Karnataka High Court granted bail to 21 people arrested in Mangalore who were arrested for offences committed allegedly during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). While stating the judgement, the Court observed that there had been a deliberate attempt by the Mangalore police to cover up the excesses they committed against the ant-CAA protestors.

The order passed by Justice John Michael Cunha read, “… a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up the police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police. Overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that the FIRs are registered under Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder) against the persons killed by the police themselves.”

The judgement also stated, “The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to fabricate evidence and to deprive the petitioners of their liberties. Any criminal antecedents of the petitioners are not disputed. There is no direct evidence to connect the petitioners with the alleged offences. The investigation appears to be mala fide and partisan.”

The Karnataka High Court also took note of CCTV footage and photographs that pointed out that the crowd was unarmed, showing only one person who was holding a bottle. “On the other hand,” the court added, “photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd.”

The Court also reprimanded the police saying that though it had registered 31 FIRs (including being charged with being members of an unlawful assembly and armed with lethal weapons) against the protestors, not a single case had been registered based on complaints made by the families of those who were injured and those who died to the police firing.

Two people were allegedly shot dead and a third was injured by the Mangalore police during protests against the CAA on December 19, 2019. A fact-finding report that was published by human rights activists said that the police allegedly went on a rampage during the protests and stormed into shops in the vicinity, pulling out people, selectively attacking Muslims. At around 4 pm, a team of police attacked Ibrahim Khaleel mosque where about 80 persons were praying peacefully. The police apparently sought to chase certain youth into the said mosque and then initiated an indiscriminate attack upon the mosque. The police launched an attack of stones and tear gas through and above the slats of the mosque gate, causing havoc and confusion.

The report also stated that the police attacked the Highland Hospital where the bodies of the deceased were kept. It was reported that the police attacked the Highland Hospital demanding that the bodies be handed over to them as they were Medico Legal Cases (MLCs). The police upon arrival at the hospital were faced by an angry group of mourners, who pelted stones at the police outside the hospital. The police engaged in lathi charge outside the hospital. They did not stop there. The police then fired tear gas within the hospital compound and proceeded to storm the hospital. They tried to barge into patient rooms including the ICU.

It said that denying bail to the petitioners would be a travesty of justice and an act of sacrificing their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and the police.

Last week, the Karnataka High Court had also ruled that the prohibitory orders passed under Section 144 CrPC on December 18 in Bangalore were illegal. Slowly but steadily, the evidence of police brutalitiy and the confessions of the police about their attacks on those protesting the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) are coming to fore. With videos of the Delhi police attacking the students at Jamia Millia Islamia University and the UP police giving a ho-hum confession about their attacks on protestors in Bijnor, it is time for the Mangalore police to own up to its brutal actions.

The complete judgement of the Karnataka High Court may be read here.


Related:

Mangaluru: Fact-finding report unearths the reality of police brutality at anti-CAA protests
Fact-finding report reveals police brutality at Aurangabad and Phulwari Sharif
‘Bloody Sunday 2019’- PUDR releases report on Jamia police brutalities

 

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Sabrang

SC’s landmark judgment: Equal roles for women in the Army

The SC ruled that all women army officers are eligible for permanent commissions, commanding roles

18 Feb 2020

Women in Army

Giving gender equality a much needed fillip in a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled that the notions that women are the “weaker” sex and may not undertake tasks that are “too arduous” for them, are constitutionally flawed, holding up a judgment that the absolute exclusion of women from Command Appointments in the Army is illegal, Live Law reported.https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif

The two-judge bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi directed that Permanent Commission should be granted to women in the Army regardless of their service in all the ten streams where the Union government has taken a decision to grant Short Service Commission to women.

The court observed, “An absolute bar on women seeking criteria or command appointments would not comport with the guarantee of equality under Article 14. Implicit in the guarantee of equality is that where the action of the State does differentiate between two classes of persons, it does not differentiate them in an unreasonable or irrational manner.” The Court added, “It is an insult to women as well as the Army when aspersions are cast on women, their ability and their achievements in the Army.”

It also observed that there was a need for change in mindsets to bring about true equality in the Army. Justice Chandrachud slammed the arguments made by the Centre which had cited that the physiological differences, domestic obligations and that male troops were not “mentally schooled” to accept women officers in command.

Saying that the Centre’s assumptions promoted “gender stereotypes” and were “highly regressive” the court ruled, “The Indian Constitution is based on equality. Denying opportunities to women was against the ethos of the Constitution. Now the Army will have to frame guidelines that are equal for men and women.”


Related:

Male troops not 'mentally schooled' to accept orders from women: Center
Gender equality in Europe ‘advancing at snail’s pace’
Feminisms – in the plural – as a politics of love

 

SC’s landmark judgment: Equal roles for women in the Army

The SC ruled that all women army officers are eligible for permanent commissions, commanding roles

Women in Army

Giving gender equality a much needed fillip in a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled that the notions that women are the “weaker” sex and may not undertake tasks that are “too arduous” for them, are constitutionally flawed, holding up a judgment that the absolute exclusion of women from Command Appointments in the Army is illegal, Live Law reported.https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif

The two-judge bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi directed that Permanent Commission should be granted to women in the Army regardless of their service in all the ten streams where the Union government has taken a decision to grant Short Service Commission to women.

The court observed, “An absolute bar on women seeking criteria or command appointments would not comport with the guarantee of equality under Article 14. Implicit in the guarantee of equality is that where the action of the State does differentiate between two classes of persons, it does not differentiate them in an unreasonable or irrational manner.” The Court added, “It is an insult to women as well as the Army when aspersions are cast on women, their ability and their achievements in the Army.”

It also observed that there was a need for change in mindsets to bring about true equality in the Army. Justice Chandrachud slammed the arguments made by the Centre which had cited that the physiological differences, domestic obligations and that male troops were not “mentally schooled” to accept women officers in command.

Saying that the Centre’s assumptions promoted “gender stereotypes” and were “highly regressive” the court ruled, “The Indian Constitution is based on equality. Denying opportunities to women was against the ethos of the Constitution. Now the Army will have to frame guidelines that are equal for men and women.”


Related:

Male troops not 'mentally schooled' to accept orders from women: Center
Gender equality in Europe ‘advancing at snail’s pace’
Feminisms – in the plural – as a politics of love

 

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Sabrang

Shaheen Bagh case: Advocates Sanjay Hegde, Sadhna Ramachandran appointed as interlocutors by SC

The apex court acknowledged the right to protests but pointed out the issue of competing interests

17 Feb 2020

Shaheen bagh

Hearing a pleas over the protests at Shaheen Bagh, the Supreme Court (SC) on Monday said that the protestors should reach a “reasonable solution” and that though people have a fundamental right to protest against a law, the blocking of public roads is a matter of concern and there must be a balancing factor with regards to the same.

A bench comprising Justices SK Kaul and KM Joseph set up a mediation team headed by Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde and Sadhna Ramachandran to hold talks with the protestors at Shaheen Bagh where the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), National Population Register (NPR) and National Register of Citizens (NRC) have been going on for over 60 days now and ask them to shift their protest to an alternative site like the Ramlila Maidan and the Jantar Mantar.

The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by advocate Amit Sahni representing Bhim Army Chief Chandrashekhar Azad who had filed an Intervention Application (IA) in the SC stating that the authorities had intentionally put up blockades on various streets to cause inconvenience to commuters and had claimed that “the allegation of road blockade by protestors is just an excuse.”

During the hearing Justice Kaul observed, “Democracy works on expression of views. But there are lines and boundaries. If you wish to protest, while the matter is being heard here, that’s also ok. But our concern is limited. Today, there could be one legislation. Tomorrow another section of society could have a problem with something else. Blocking traffic and causing inconvenience is our concern. My concern is if everybody starts blocking roads, may be due to genuine concerns, where does it stop…”

The Court also said, “It is very important that people are allowed to express their grievance. Judicial review is there but people have the right to protest against the legislation. Opinion formation takes place when there is a protest. Every right has to be coupled with responsibility. You have a right to protest but there is a larger issue of competing interests.”

The counsel for the intervenors submitted that essential services like school buses, ambulances, etc. were given passage all this time, the Solicitor General said that “there was a complete blockade.” He also said that the protests were keeping “women and children in front”, adding, “We have tried to hold several meetings. You cannot hold an entire city hostage under the garb of protests.”

On February 10, the two-judge bench had issued notices to the Centre, Delhi government and the Delhi Police with regards to the protest. The protest at Shaheen Bagh that began on December 15, is a one-of-a-kind post-independence women-led protest to protect the identities of the minorities and the marginalized is still going strong.

The next hearing in the matter has been scheduled for February 24.


Related:

Sisterhood unites to fight oppression: Forest workers meet Shaheen Bagh protesters
Allahabad HC stays recovery notice by UP government, matter pending in SC
Don’t label anti-CAA protesters ‘traitors’, people bound to defend rights in a democracy: Bombay HC

 

Shaheen Bagh case: Advocates Sanjay Hegde, Sadhna Ramachandran appointed as interlocutors by SC

The apex court acknowledged the right to protests but pointed out the issue of competing interests

Shaheen bagh

Hearing a pleas over the protests at Shaheen Bagh, the Supreme Court (SC) on Monday said that the protestors should reach a “reasonable solution” and that though people have a fundamental right to protest against a law, the blocking of public roads is a matter of concern and there must be a balancing factor with regards to the same.

A bench comprising Justices SK Kaul and KM Joseph set up a mediation team headed by Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde and Sadhna Ramachandran to hold talks with the protestors at Shaheen Bagh where the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), National Population Register (NPR) and National Register of Citizens (NRC) have been going on for over 60 days now and ask them to shift their protest to an alternative site like the Ramlila Maidan and the Jantar Mantar.

The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by advocate Amit Sahni representing Bhim Army Chief Chandrashekhar Azad who had filed an Intervention Application (IA) in the SC stating that the authorities had intentionally put up blockades on various streets to cause inconvenience to commuters and had claimed that “the allegation of road blockade by protestors is just an excuse.”

During the hearing Justice Kaul observed, “Democracy works on expression of views. But there are lines and boundaries. If you wish to protest, while the matter is being heard here, that’s also ok. But our concern is limited. Today, there could be one legislation. Tomorrow another section of society could have a problem with something else. Blocking traffic and causing inconvenience is our concern. My concern is if everybody starts blocking roads, may be due to genuine concerns, where does it stop…”

The Court also said, “It is very important that people are allowed to express their grievance. Judicial review is there but people have the right to protest against the legislation. Opinion formation takes place when there is a protest. Every right has to be coupled with responsibility. You have a right to protest but there is a larger issue of competing interests.”

The counsel for the intervenors submitted that essential services like school buses, ambulances, etc. were given passage all this time, the Solicitor General said that “there was a complete blockade.” He also said that the protests were keeping “women and children in front”, adding, “We have tried to hold several meetings. You cannot hold an entire city hostage under the garb of protests.”

On February 10, the two-judge bench had issued notices to the Centre, Delhi government and the Delhi Police with regards to the protest. The protest at Shaheen Bagh that began on December 15, is a one-of-a-kind post-independence women-led protest to protect the identities of the minorities and the marginalized is still going strong.

The next hearing in the matter has been scheduled for February 24.


Related:

Sisterhood unites to fight oppression: Forest workers meet Shaheen Bagh protesters
Allahabad HC stays recovery notice by UP government, matter pending in SC
Don’t label anti-CAA protesters ‘traitors’, people bound to defend rights in a democracy: Bombay HC

 

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Sabrang

Delhi HC seeks Centre, police stand on injured Jamia student compensation plea

Seeking a Rs.2 crore compensation, the petitioner alleged that both his legs suffered fractures in the police violence on Dec 15

17 Feb 2020

delhi

On Monday, February 17, the Delhi High Court (HC) issued notices to the Centre and the Delhi Police on a petition filed by a student of the Jamia Millia Islamia University seeking a compensation of Rs. 2 crore for injuries he sustained during the December 15, 2019 violence at the university, The Quint reported.

Shayaan Mujeeb, the petitioner, allegedly sustained injuries on both his legs due to the reported police brutalities in the Jamia library and said that he had spent Rs. 2 lakh on his treatment. He said that due to the attack, a metal rod had to be inserted in his right leg. In his petition he asked for interim compensation of Rs. 25 lakhs and a reimbursement of all related future medical expenses. To support his claim, he submitted MLCs, discharge summaries and photographs that demonstrated the severity of his injuries.

A bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Hari Shankar asked the Central government and the Delhi Police to file in their responses by May 27.

Nabila Hasan, counsel appearing for Mujeeb said that the brutalities on him by the Delhi police had caused fractures in both his legs and would leave him limping throughout his life. The Centre, however, denied the claim to which Mujeeb’s counsel retorted saying that there was CCTV footage for the violence that happened in the library that day.

Videos of police violence on the students of Jamia are currently doing the rounds. The Jamia Coordination Committee released a video showing police charging students with lathis, which police claim to be ‘edited’.

Post the first video, the Delhi Police released new CCTV footage showing students purportedly entering the Old Reading Hall in the MA/MPhil Department of the university and carrying stones in their hands. In the footage, the students can be seen barricading the door shut with tables.

However, the sequence of events in a video by Maktoob Media show the extended footage of the video the police used to show 'rioters' had entered the library. This video shows that when helpless and unarmed students tried to exit the library police beat them up brutally.

 

Related:

Video shows Delhi Police assaulting students in Jamia library
Delhi Police's clipped video trying to justify Jamia violence backfires

 

Delhi HC seeks Centre, police stand on injured Jamia student compensation plea

Seeking a Rs.2 crore compensation, the petitioner alleged that both his legs suffered fractures in the police violence on Dec 15

delhi

On Monday, February 17, the Delhi High Court (HC) issued notices to the Centre and the Delhi Police on a petition filed by a student of the Jamia Millia Islamia University seeking a compensation of Rs. 2 crore for injuries he sustained during the December 15, 2019 violence at the university, The Quint reported.

Shayaan Mujeeb, the petitioner, allegedly sustained injuries on both his legs due to the reported police brutalities in the Jamia library and said that he had spent Rs. 2 lakh on his treatment. He said that due to the attack, a metal rod had to be inserted in his right leg. In his petition he asked for interim compensation of Rs. 25 lakhs and a reimbursement of all related future medical expenses. To support his claim, he submitted MLCs, discharge summaries and photographs that demonstrated the severity of his injuries.

A bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Hari Shankar asked the Central government and the Delhi Police to file in their responses by May 27.

Nabila Hasan, counsel appearing for Mujeeb said that the brutalities on him by the Delhi police had caused fractures in both his legs and would leave him limping throughout his life. The Centre, however, denied the claim to which Mujeeb’s counsel retorted saying that there was CCTV footage for the violence that happened in the library that day.

Videos of police violence on the students of Jamia are currently doing the rounds. The Jamia Coordination Committee released a video showing police charging students with lathis, which police claim to be ‘edited’.

Post the first video, the Delhi Police released new CCTV footage showing students purportedly entering the Old Reading Hall in the MA/MPhil Department of the university and carrying stones in their hands. In the footage, the students can be seen barricading the door shut with tables.

However, the sequence of events in a video by Maktoob Media show the extended footage of the video the police used to show 'rioters' had entered the library. This video shows that when helpless and unarmed students tried to exit the library police beat them up brutally.

 

Related:

Video shows Delhi Police assaulting students in Jamia library
Delhi Police's clipped video trying to justify Jamia violence backfires

 

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Sabrang

Put criminal records of candidates on website and newspapers: SC to political parties

The Election Commission welcomed the SC order and is making changes to its affidavit

17 Feb 2020

SC

Taking into account the increasing degree of criminalization of politics, the Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday directed all political parties to upload details of pending criminal cases of candidates contesting polls on their websites.

The court also said that the parties would have to also upload on their website the reasons for selecting candidates with pending criminal cases against them. Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman delivered the judgement that stated, “The reasons as to selection shall be with reference to the qualifications, achievements and merit of the candidate concerned, and not mere “winnability” at the polls.”

The judgement pointed out that over the last four general elections, there had been an alarming increase in the incidence of criminals in politics. In 2004, 24% of the MPs had criminal cases pending against them; in 2009 the number went up to 30% and in 2019, 43% of MPs were found with criminal charges registered against them. The court also asked the political parties to offer an explanation as to why candidates with pending criminal cases were selected in the first place. https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif

The SC order states that apart from putting up the information of criminal cases of candidates on websites, they have will have to issue a declaration in widely circulated newspapers (one local vernacular and one national newspaper) in the locality about the antecedents of the candidate (at least thrice after filing of the nomination papers) and also give wide publicity in the electronic media. The SC also asked the political parties to submit a report of compliance with these directions with the Election Commission (EC) within 72 hours of the selection of the said candidate, failing which the EC shall bring such non-compliance by the political party concerned to the notice of the SC as being in contempt of the Court’s directions.

Post the SC order, the EC said that it wholeheartedly welcomed the order and would make relevant modifications to implement the court’s directives. The EC in a press release said, “Election Commission whole-heartedly welcomes this landmark order, which is bound to go a long way in setting new moral yardsticks for overall betterment of electoral democracy.”

In order to help the voters make a more informed choice, the EC is working on a revamped affidavit that will have a separate category to list heinous cases like murder, rape, rioting, etc. against candidates, reported the Economic Times. An EC official told ET, “At present, all crimes are bunched in the affidavit, whether it may be a case that attracts a year’s imprisonment or seven. We feel that the gravity of the crime involved must be highlighted, as the Supreme Court also instructed. So we are working on a framework which will classify heinous crimes separately. This will give voters a more informed choice.”


Related:

EC bars hate-mongering BJP leaders from campaigning: Delhi
Jharkhand Assembly elections: JVM (P) has highest candidates with criminal charges

 

Put criminal records of candidates on website and newspapers: SC to political parties

The Election Commission welcomed the SC order and is making changes to its affidavit

SC

Taking into account the increasing degree of criminalization of politics, the Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday directed all political parties to upload details of pending criminal cases of candidates contesting polls on their websites.

The court also said that the parties would have to also upload on their website the reasons for selecting candidates with pending criminal cases against them. Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman delivered the judgement that stated, “The reasons as to selection shall be with reference to the qualifications, achievements and merit of the candidate concerned, and not mere “winnability” at the polls.”

The judgement pointed out that over the last four general elections, there had been an alarming increase in the incidence of criminals in politics. In 2004, 24% of the MPs had criminal cases pending against them; in 2009 the number went up to 30% and in 2019, 43% of MPs were found with criminal charges registered against them. The court also asked the political parties to offer an explanation as to why candidates with pending criminal cases were selected in the first place. https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif

The SC order states that apart from putting up the information of criminal cases of candidates on websites, they have will have to issue a declaration in widely circulated newspapers (one local vernacular and one national newspaper) in the locality about the antecedents of the candidate (at least thrice after filing of the nomination papers) and also give wide publicity in the electronic media. The SC also asked the political parties to submit a report of compliance with these directions with the Election Commission (EC) within 72 hours of the selection of the said candidate, failing which the EC shall bring such non-compliance by the political party concerned to the notice of the SC as being in contempt of the Court’s directions.

Post the SC order, the EC said that it wholeheartedly welcomed the order and would make relevant modifications to implement the court’s directives. The EC in a press release said, “Election Commission whole-heartedly welcomes this landmark order, which is bound to go a long way in setting new moral yardsticks for overall betterment of electoral democracy.”

In order to help the voters make a more informed choice, the EC is working on a revamped affidavit that will have a separate category to list heinous cases like murder, rape, rioting, etc. against candidates, reported the Economic Times. An EC official told ET, “At present, all crimes are bunched in the affidavit, whether it may be a case that attracts a year’s imprisonment or seven. We feel that the gravity of the crime involved must be highlighted, as the Supreme Court also instructed. So we are working on a framework which will classify heinous crimes separately. This will give voters a more informed choice.”


Related:

EC bars hate-mongering BJP leaders from campaigning: Delhi
Jharkhand Assembly elections: JVM (P) has highest candidates with criminal charges

 

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Sabrang

Delhi Police's clipped video trying to justify Jamia violence backfires

While Delh's Crime Branch released video showing young men seeking refuge entering library and claim they are rioters carrying stones, longer footage that surfaced soon after, debunking the police's claim, and showcasing even more horrifying visuals of brutality

17 Feb 2020

Jamia Video

Day after the Jamia Coordination Committee tweeted a video of security personnel entering the first floor reading hall of the MA/MPhil section of the Jamia Milia Islamia University on the night of December 15, 2019, and brutally beating students, police appear to have gone into damage control mode. In a desperate bid to reclaim control over the narrative and perhaps even offer a shameless justification of violence, police have now released their own video of what transpired in the library.

This new video shows alleged ‘rioters’ entering the library with stones in their hands. The video was accessed by India Today from the Delhi Police Crime Branch. Police claim that the people in the video are ‘rioters’ who took refuge in the library to escape the police crackdown. The video may be viewed here:

 

 

A few young men can be seen in the video entering a room, one after the other. One of them, a long-haired young man, appears to be holding something in his hand that the police claim is a stone. There are about 10 to 15 people in the video who immediately barricade the door to the library using a desk.

This new video comes just a day after the Jamia Coordination Committee released the following video:

 

 

This video clearly shows security personnel repeatedly beating students who are sitting quietly and studying. Police personnel can be seen raining lathi blows on these students, who do not engage in any counter attack, but meekly try to defend themselves by holding up their hands to avoid blows to the head. 

But just when the Delhi Police thought it had won the video war, another longer video of the CCTV footage emerged. Maktoob Media released the following extended footage of the same CCTV camera that the police had used to show 'rioters' had entered the library. This video shows that when helpless and unarmed students tried to exit the library police beat them up brutally. The version released by the police had cleverly omitted this extended part of the footage. The video may be viewed here:

The counter strategy applied by the police of releasing one video to invalidate another, appears to have backfired. When they tried to defend their actions, the new video clearly shows there is no justification for the violence against students.


Related:

Video shows Delhi Police assaulting students in Jamia library

 

Delhi Police's clipped video trying to justify Jamia violence backfires

While Delh's Crime Branch released video showing young men seeking refuge entering library and claim they are rioters carrying stones, longer footage that surfaced soon after, debunking the police's claim, and showcasing even more horrifying visuals of brutality

Jamia Video

Day after the Jamia Coordination Committee tweeted a video of security personnel entering the first floor reading hall of the MA/MPhil section of the Jamia Milia Islamia University on the night of December 15, 2019, and brutally beating students, police appear to have gone into damage control mode. In a desperate bid to reclaim control over the narrative and perhaps even offer a shameless justification of violence, police have now released their own video of what transpired in the library.

This new video shows alleged ‘rioters’ entering the library with stones in their hands. The video was accessed by India Today from the Delhi Police Crime Branch. Police claim that the people in the video are ‘rioters’ who took refuge in the library to escape the police crackdown. The video may be viewed here:

 

 

A few young men can be seen in the video entering a room, one after the other. One of them, a long-haired young man, appears to be holding something in his hand that the police claim is a stone. There are about 10 to 15 people in the video who immediately barricade the door to the library using a desk.

This new video comes just a day after the Jamia Coordination Committee released the following video:

 

 

This video clearly shows security personnel repeatedly beating students who are sitting quietly and studying. Police personnel can be seen raining lathi blows on these students, who do not engage in any counter attack, but meekly try to defend themselves by holding up their hands to avoid blows to the head. 

But just when the Delhi Police thought it had won the video war, another longer video of the CCTV footage emerged. Maktoob Media released the following extended footage of the same CCTV camera that the police had used to show 'rioters' had entered the library. This video shows that when helpless and unarmed students tried to exit the library police beat them up brutally. The version released by the police had cleverly omitted this extended part of the footage. The video may be viewed here:

The counter strategy applied by the police of releasing one video to invalidate another, appears to have backfired. When they tried to defend their actions, the new video clearly shows there is no justification for the violence against students.


Related:

Video shows Delhi Police assaulting students in Jamia library

 

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Sabrang

Shocking Expose: Video shows Delhi Police assaulting students in Jamia library

Jamia police assault video: This 44-second video reveals policemen wearing anti-riot gear, entering the library. There were around 10-20 students inside when cops thrashed the students with batons and pushed them outside the hall.

16 Feb 2020

Jamia

Jamia students have been widely speaking about thus traumatic experience but, to date, no statutory body, has initiated any independent probe.

Just two months after the alleged police brutality inside Jamia campus, another CCTV footage has emerged showing policemen beating up students.

On December 15, a protest against the contentious Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) turned violent after protesters allegedly pelted stones at the police and set public buses on fire. While there were serious allegations that the police entered the college library and beat up the students, who weren’t protesting, no FIR has, to date been registered, nor a probe ordered.

On Saturday, February 15, another such video was released by the Jamia students. The 44-second video showed policemen wearing anti-riot gear, entering the library. There were around 10-20 students inside as cops thrashed the students with batons and pushed them outside the hall.

While sharing the video clipping on the micro blogging site, Twitter,   the Jamia Coordination Committee has claimed that the incident took place on the first floor of MA, MPhil section inside Old Reading Hall on December 15. The tweet also said, “Shame on you Delhi Police.”

Sabrangindia has also learned of a huge destruction of library books and manuscripts during the police assault bit authorities refuse to confirm this.

 

 

Jamia authorities confirmed that the video was from inside the library but haven’t released an official statement yet.

RP Meena, DCP (south-east) is reported by The Indian Express to have said,  “The case is being probed by the crime branch. We will check whether the video is with them and also the authentication of the video. We can comment once the video is checked.”

Special Commissioner (Crime) Praveer Ranjan assured that the police will investigate the latest video. “We have taken cognizance of the latest video (of December 15) of Jamia Millia Islamia University which has surfaced now, we will investigate it,” Ranjan told reporters.

 

Shocking Expose: Video shows Delhi Police assaulting students in Jamia library

Jamia police assault video: This 44-second video reveals policemen wearing anti-riot gear, entering the library. There were around 10-20 students inside when cops thrashed the students with batons and pushed them outside the hall.

Jamia

Jamia students have been widely speaking about thus traumatic experience but, to date, no statutory body, has initiated any independent probe.

Just two months after the alleged police brutality inside Jamia campus, another CCTV footage has emerged showing policemen beating up students.

On December 15, a protest against the contentious Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) turned violent after protesters allegedly pelted stones at the police and set public buses on fire. While there were serious allegations that the police entered the college library and beat up the students, who weren’t protesting, no FIR has, to date been registered, nor a probe ordered.

On Saturday, February 15, another such video was released by the Jamia students. The 44-second video showed policemen wearing anti-riot gear, entering the library. There were around 10-20 students inside as cops thrashed the students with batons and pushed them outside the hall.

While sharing the video clipping on the micro blogging site, Twitter,   the Jamia Coordination Committee has claimed that the incident took place on the first floor of MA, MPhil section inside Old Reading Hall on December 15. The tweet also said, “Shame on you Delhi Police.”

Sabrangindia has also learned of a huge destruction of library books and manuscripts during the police assault bit authorities refuse to confirm this.

 

 

Jamia authorities confirmed that the video was from inside the library but haven’t released an official statement yet.

RP Meena, DCP (south-east) is reported by The Indian Express to have said,  “The case is being probed by the crime branch. We will check whether the video is with them and also the authentication of the video. We can comment once the video is checked.”

Special Commissioner (Crime) Praveer Ranjan assured that the police will investigate the latest video. “We have taken cognizance of the latest video (of December 15) of Jamia Millia Islamia University which has surfaced now, we will investigate it,” Ranjan told reporters.

 

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Sabrang

Brutalising Innocence: A report on police excesses on minors in UP

A fact finding report reveals the horrific details of detention and torture of minors by the UP police

16 Feb 2020

UP Police

The ongoing protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), National Register of Citizens (NRC) and National Population Register (NPR) have brought along with them news of brutal attacks on protestors and worse, the attacks on minors, especially by the Uttar Pradesh police.

The Quill Foundation, Citizens Against Hate and HAQ: Centre for Childs Rights formulated a committee to look into the detention and torture of minors in Uttar Pradesh, in the districts of Bijnor, Muzaffarnagar, Firozabad and other places.

The report shows that the abuse of minors is spread across two primary districts of Muzaffarnagar (14 minors) and Bijnor (22 minors), both of which have more than 40% Muslim population and a high concentration of national minority institutions where children from across the country are studying.
 

The many forms of torture

The UP police allegedly beat the minors with batons and lathis who were arrested every two to three hours on the lower parts of their body rendering them unable to walk. Not only this, they were not provided any blankets in the bone-chilling January winter.

“Mostly they beat us on the lower parts of our body. I was not able to walk properly for 15 days. The police detained me on Friday and released on Sunday night. Till then I was in custody where they beat me brutally,” Y said. (Bijnor)

Y’s mother too recounted the horror. She said, “At last, Y came home after two days with his toes crushed and bruises on his body. He was barely walking and his lower part of the body had turned blue due to beatings by the police.... They were given severe beatings during their period of detention. They were first taken to Bijnor Police Lines and then shifted to a farmhouse owned by a BJP MLA. During their illegal detention, Y and others were beaten up mercilessly by the local police officials and were not even given blankets in the spine-chilling cold winter night.... It was the most shocking thing to hear the account of those two days from Y”.

It was just physical assault that the minors had to face. They were reportedly tortured by way of sleep deprivation. In Bijnor, a minor said that, even though temperatures dropped to 6 degree Celsius, no warmth or sleeping arrangements were made for any detainees. Moreover, the minors were not allowed to sleep and if they did, were brutally beaten.

I pressed my fingers against my eyelids to keep my eyes open.” Said 17-year-old E. “If you nodded off, the guards would hit you with a stick.” (Bijnor)

Using psychological torture to get the minors to testify for the crimes they didn’t do, the UP police in some cases refused to let the minors visit the washroom to relieve themselves and in some cases even refused drinking water when they were thirsty.

First the police gave us all water, which we drank because we were thirsty.” Said B. “But then we realised we would be beaten every time we wanted to pee.” (Bijnor)

They refused to give us water and said that if we are so thirsty, we should drink their urine.” said a student who didn’t want to be named...” (Muzaffarnagar)

Syed Asad Raza Hussaini, Founder and Principal of the Madrasaxi in Muzaffarnagar said: “On Fridays students observe fast. They asked for water to break fast that evening. They were all denied water. Police abused and passed derogatory remarks against Islamic religious figures – the prophet. They were forced to say Jai Shri Ram.” (Muzaffarnagar)

The UP police told the detained children of Bijnor that the reason for their detention and abuse by police was in order to “teach them to never attend a public demonstration again”. All five minors confirmed that they were not only detained along with adults but also made to witness them being tortured.

I was pushed inside a big hall where about 150 people were detained and were being beaten up. I saw many young people and children in the age group of 15-16 years in the group as well. Police officials were beating everybody present in the hall. While one police official had Torture Testimonies 6 held the hands of the detainees, the other police official was raining lathi blows mercilessly on bare bodies.”(Bijnor)

Post the arrests, the police also released posters with pictures of persons who ‘allegedly’ protested in the anti-CAA rally. Due to this, many young boys whose faces were used in the poster were sent away by their parents fearing police action.

In Raukhedi, Jalalabad, District Bijnor, the community reported how the police barged into their homes late at night and vandalized property while threatening families to cooperate with the police.

Finally, to paint themselves to be followers of the law, the police allegedly contacted madrasa officials / heads asking them to give statements saying no beating or torture took place. In return, they said they would release everyone still in custody, otherwise cases would drag on.
 

Violation of Laws and Standards

Violation of the Juvenile Justice Act - Detention of every minor that took place in the two districts is a violation of the JJ Act and the Rules made under the Central Government and the U.P. State Government.  

Both Model Rules and the U.P. State Rules on Juvenile Justice clearly require that no child shall be apprehended for petty or serious offences. Registration of FIR and apprehension is allowed only for heinous offences, and that too if such apprehension is necessary in the best interest of the child. Going by the list of offences figuring in the FIR in Nagina, all the offences are either petty offences or serious offences as per Section 2 (45) and Section 2 (54) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

According to the JJ Act, a Child Welfare Police Officer / Special Juvenile Police Unit is responsible for producing the child before the Juvenile Justice Board within a period of 24 hours. However, as mentioned in the testimonies, no minor was produced before any Board and instead all of them were held for longer than 24 hours without any accountability. Neither were any of the children placed under any Child Welfare Police Officer. This means that under no circumstances, should a child be placed in a police lockup or lodged in a jail. All minors detained in UP were not only detained in police lock ups but also tortured and made to witness police torture.

The ‘General Principles of Care and Protection of Children’ – dignity, equality, care, best interest, right to be heard, safety, privacy and confidentiality, non-stigmatising semantics, non-discrimination, restoration to their families at the earliest – all of these were flouted by the UP police.

In revealing their identities by means of posters and circulating pictures of these minors, the police also violated their privacy, something which is prohibited by the JJ Act.

The UP police also violated the human rights principles of the UN Child Rights Convention (UNCRC). The UP police did not abide by any national or international standard operating procedure and in no way was a child’s well-being their concern. In fact, the torture they subjected the children to was a direct and immediate threat to the children’s life.
 

The stand of the UP police, State and other ‘welfare’ agencies

Bijnor superintendent of police Sanjeev Tyagi claimed to be unaware of any minors being detained and instead asked the journalist covering the incident for evidence. He said, “When we told him that the children had said that they had been in the lockup, and had been released, he asked for their names so he could check, and said that this was the first time that he was hearing about it. Tyagi insisted he had not received any allegations of brutality, and so no investigation was taking place. If he got a complaint, he said, a probe would take place.

With regards to violence against children in UP, the government has not taken cognizance or issued any statements. Instead, in a video, the Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath guaranteed that “badla” (revenge) will be taken against protestors. On 27th December, 2019, justifying the UP police crackdown on anti-CAA protestors, he said that the police actions have “shocked” protestors into silence.

The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) issued a notice to all Director Generals of Police in all states citing the misuse of children as “shields”, a violation of the JJ Act 2015. However, any form of police excesses failed to find mention in the notice issued.

The Uttar Pradesh State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (UPSCPCR), instead of condemning the violence, offered further impunity to the police. In a notice issued to District Magistrates, it asked for a report on minors being used as “human shields” by protestors. Again, no mention of police excesses was found.
 

Recommendations of the fact-finding committee

Post their findings, the members of the Quill Foundation, Citizens Against Hate and HAQ have come up with recommendations for the UP government and the National Human Rights Commission so that they can take action against the errant police officials and other government officials who allowed the torture and detention of minors.

It asked for a time bound (3 months) judicial inquiry on police action from 20.12.2019, focusing on child rights violations as per state and national laws. Directions based on inquiry to be acted on within specific time period with the aim to include a) justice for minors and their families and b) accountability of officers responsible.

It also recommended that the minors be compensated for the physical, mental and psychological violence and loss suffered by them and counselling of the victims and their families.

Apart from this it asked for a judicial inquiry and age determination of detainees under 21 years to be conducted according to rules prescribed under Section 94 of the JJ Act, 2015; apart from issuing a public notice regarding rights of minors, especially vis-a-vis police action and Rule 8(3) of the JJ Act, 2015 and UP JJ Rules, 2019.
 

In conclusion

Close to 41 minors are/were allegedly detained and subjected to custodial torture. Of these, 22 minors were detained and tortured in Bijnor and 14 minors in Muzaffarnagar. Of the latter, FIRs were filed against four minors who were released after 12 days of detention. Some minors did not receive legal aid. An 8-year-old was killed in a stampede and two minors sustained bullet injuries in Lucknow.

The police forced the family of the 8-year-old minor to conduct a high-security burial. They intimidated and induced fear in the citizenry post the arrests of the children through torturing their families, attaching their assets and asking them to compensate for the loss of public property during the violence at the anti-CAA protests.

Reports of the UP police sexually torturing detained minors also surfaced, where some of the boys in custody allegedly had to be hospitalized with cases of rectal bleeding.

With the government not holding the police accountable for its crimes, how will these minors get justice and who will give it to them?

The entire report may be read below.


Related:

Did UP police sexually torture minors in custody?
Delhi Police detains 18 minors in Daryaganj during anti-CAA protests
Two from Hindutva fringe outfits arrested for Patna teen’s murder

Brutalising Innocence: A report on police excesses on minors in UP

A fact finding report reveals the horrific details of detention and torture of minors by the UP police

UP Police

The ongoing protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), National Register of Citizens (NRC) and National Population Register (NPR) have brought along with them news of brutal attacks on protestors and worse, the attacks on minors, especially by the Uttar Pradesh police.

The Quill Foundation, Citizens Against Hate and HAQ: Centre for Childs Rights formulated a committee to look into the detention and torture of minors in Uttar Pradesh, in the districts of Bijnor, Muzaffarnagar, Firozabad and other places.

The report shows that the abuse of minors is spread across two primary districts of Muzaffarnagar (14 minors) and Bijnor (22 minors), both of which have more than 40% Muslim population and a high concentration of national minority institutions where children from across the country are studying.
 

The many forms of torture

The UP police allegedly beat the minors with batons and lathis who were arrested every two to three hours on the lower parts of their body rendering them unable to walk. Not only this, they were not provided any blankets in the bone-chilling January winter.

“Mostly they beat us on the lower parts of our body. I was not able to walk properly for 15 days. The police detained me on Friday and released on Sunday night. Till then I was in custody where they beat me brutally,” Y said. (Bijnor)

Y’s mother too recounted the horror. She said, “At last, Y came home after two days with his toes crushed and bruises on his body. He was barely walking and his lower part of the body had turned blue due to beatings by the police.... They were given severe beatings during their period of detention. They were first taken to Bijnor Police Lines and then shifted to a farmhouse owned by a BJP MLA. During their illegal detention, Y and others were beaten up mercilessly by the local police officials and were not even given blankets in the spine-chilling cold winter night.... It was the most shocking thing to hear the account of those two days from Y”.

It was just physical assault that the minors had to face. They were reportedly tortured by way of sleep deprivation. In Bijnor, a minor said that, even though temperatures dropped to 6 degree Celsius, no warmth or sleeping arrangements were made for any detainees. Moreover, the minors were not allowed to sleep and if they did, were brutally beaten.

I pressed my fingers against my eyelids to keep my eyes open.” Said 17-year-old E. “If you nodded off, the guards would hit you with a stick.” (Bijnor)

Using psychological torture to get the minors to testify for the crimes they didn’t do, the UP police in some cases refused to let the minors visit the washroom to relieve themselves and in some cases even refused drinking water when they were thirsty.

First the police gave us all water, which we drank because we were thirsty.” Said B. “But then we realised we would be beaten every time we wanted to pee.” (Bijnor)

They refused to give us water and said that if we are so thirsty, we should drink their urine.” said a student who didn’t want to be named...” (Muzaffarnagar)

Syed Asad Raza Hussaini, Founder and Principal of the Madrasaxi in Muzaffarnagar said: “On Fridays students observe fast. They asked for water to break fast that evening. They were all denied water. Police abused and passed derogatory remarks against Islamic religious figures – the prophet. They were forced to say Jai Shri Ram.” (Muzaffarnagar)

The UP police told the detained children of Bijnor that the reason for their detention and abuse by police was in order to “teach them to never attend a public demonstration again”. All five minors confirmed that they were not only detained along with adults but also made to witness them being tortured.

I was pushed inside a big hall where about 150 people were detained and were being beaten up. I saw many young people and children in the age group of 15-16 years in the group as well. Police officials were beating everybody present in the hall. While one police official had Torture Testimonies 6 held the hands of the detainees, the other police official was raining lathi blows mercilessly on bare bodies.”(Bijnor)

Post the arrests, the police also released posters with pictures of persons who ‘allegedly’ protested in the anti-CAA rally. Due to this, many young boys whose faces were used in the poster were sent away by their parents fearing police action.

In Raukhedi, Jalalabad, District Bijnor, the community reported how the police barged into their homes late at night and vandalized property while threatening families to cooperate with the police.

Finally, to paint themselves to be followers of the law, the police allegedly contacted madrasa officials / heads asking them to give statements saying no beating or torture took place. In return, they said they would release everyone still in custody, otherwise cases would drag on.
 

Violation of Laws and Standards

Violation of the Juvenile Justice Act - Detention of every minor that took place in the two districts is a violation of the JJ Act and the Rules made under the Central Government and the U.P. State Government.  

Both Model Rules and the U.P. State Rules on Juvenile Justice clearly require that no child shall be apprehended for petty or serious offences. Registration of FIR and apprehension is allowed only for heinous offences, and that too if such apprehension is necessary in the best interest of the child. Going by the list of offences figuring in the FIR in Nagina, all the offences are either petty offences or serious offences as per Section 2 (45) and Section 2 (54) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

According to the JJ Act, a Child Welfare Police Officer / Special Juvenile Police Unit is responsible for producing the child before the Juvenile Justice Board within a period of 24 hours. However, as mentioned in the testimonies, no minor was produced before any Board and instead all of them were held for longer than 24 hours without any accountability. Neither were any of the children placed under any Child Welfare Police Officer. This means that under no circumstances, should a child be placed in a police lockup or lodged in a jail. All minors detained in UP were not only detained in police lock ups but also tortured and made to witness police torture.

The ‘General Principles of Care and Protection of Children’ – dignity, equality, care, best interest, right to be heard, safety, privacy and confidentiality, non-stigmatising semantics, non-discrimination, restoration to their families at the earliest – all of these were flouted by the UP police.

In revealing their identities by means of posters and circulating pictures of these minors, the police also violated their privacy, something which is prohibited by the JJ Act.

The UP police also violated the human rights principles of the UN Child Rights Convention (UNCRC). The UP police did not abide by any national or international standard operating procedure and in no way was a child’s well-being their concern. In fact, the torture they subjected the children to was a direct and immediate threat to the children’s life.
 

The stand of the UP police, State and other ‘welfare’ agencies

Bijnor superintendent of police Sanjeev Tyagi claimed to be unaware of any minors being detained and instead asked the journalist covering the incident for evidence. He said, “When we told him that the children had said that they had been in the lockup, and had been released, he asked for their names so he could check, and said that this was the first time that he was hearing about it. Tyagi insisted he had not received any allegations of brutality, and so no investigation was taking place. If he got a complaint, he said, a probe would take place.

With regards to violence against children in UP, the government has not taken cognizance or issued any statements. Instead, in a video, the Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath guaranteed that “badla” (revenge) will be taken against protestors. On 27th December, 2019, justifying the UP police crackdown on anti-CAA protestors, he said that the police actions have “shocked” protestors into silence.

The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) issued a notice to all Director Generals of Police in all states citing the misuse of children as “shields”, a violation of the JJ Act 2015. However, any form of police excesses failed to find mention in the notice issued.

The Uttar Pradesh State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (UPSCPCR), instead of condemning the violence, offered further impunity to the police. In a notice issued to District Magistrates, it asked for a report on minors being used as “human shields” by protestors. Again, no mention of police excesses was found.
 

Recommendations of the fact-finding committee

Post their findings, the members of the Quill Foundation, Citizens Against Hate and HAQ have come up with recommendations for the UP government and the National Human Rights Commission so that they can take action against the errant police officials and other government officials who allowed the torture and detention of minors.

It asked for a time bound (3 months) judicial inquiry on police action from 20.12.2019, focusing on child rights violations as per state and national laws. Directions based on inquiry to be acted on within specific time period with the aim to include a) justice for minors and their families and b) accountability of officers responsible.

It also recommended that the minors be compensated for the physical, mental and psychological violence and loss suffered by them and counselling of the victims and their families.

Apart from this it asked for a judicial inquiry and age determination of detainees under 21 years to be conducted according to rules prescribed under Section 94 of the JJ Act, 2015; apart from issuing a public notice regarding rights of minors, especially vis-a-vis police action and Rule 8(3) of the JJ Act, 2015 and UP JJ Rules, 2019.
 

In conclusion

Close to 41 minors are/were allegedly detained and subjected to custodial torture. Of these, 22 minors were detained and tortured in Bijnor and 14 minors in Muzaffarnagar. Of the latter, FIRs were filed against four minors who were released after 12 days of detention. Some minors did not receive legal aid. An 8-year-old was killed in a stampede and two minors sustained bullet injuries in Lucknow.

The police forced the family of the 8-year-old minor to conduct a high-security burial. They intimidated and induced fear in the citizenry post the arrests of the children through torturing their families, attaching their assets and asking them to compensate for the loss of public property during the violence at the anti-CAA protests.

Reports of the UP police sexually torturing detained minors also surfaced, where some of the boys in custody allegedly had to be hospitalized with cases of rectal bleeding.

With the government not holding the police accountable for its crimes, how will these minors get justice and who will give it to them?

The entire report may be read below.


Related:

Did UP police sexually torture minors in custody?
Delhi Police detains 18 minors in Daryaganj during anti-CAA protests
Two from Hindutva fringe outfits arrested for Patna teen’s murder

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Sabrang

Election card is proof of citizenship: Court

Persons may lie but documents cannot, held the Court

15 Feb 2020

Election card

MUMBAI: A magistrate court has recently held that original election cards are proof of citizenship. This order was passed this week while acquitting a Mankhurd couple arrested in 2017 on suspicion of being Bangladeshi nationals illegally living in India.  The court held a birth certificate, a domicile certificate, a bona fide certificate and a passport can be relied upon to establish the origin of any person. "Even the election card (voting card) can be said to be sufficient proof of citizenship as while applying for the election card or a voting card, a person has to file a declaration with the authority in view of Form 6 of Peoples Representation Act to the authority that he is a citizen of India and if the declaration is found false, he is liable for punishment," the court said.

In its order reported by The Times of India, the court further said the documents submitted by the accused, Abbas Shaikh (45) and Rabiya Shaikh (40), were not rebutted by the prosecution or proven to be fake. "It is necessary to mention that the person may lie but the documents will never," the court said.https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif

The court clarified that Aadhar card, PAN card, driving licence or ration card cannot be termed as the documents proving citizenship as they are not meant for the purpose. 

 

Election card is proof of citizenship: Court

Persons may lie but documents cannot, held the Court

Election card

MUMBAI: A magistrate court has recently held that original election cards are proof of citizenship. This order was passed this week while acquitting a Mankhurd couple arrested in 2017 on suspicion of being Bangladeshi nationals illegally living in India.  The court held a birth certificate, a domicile certificate, a bona fide certificate and a passport can be relied upon to establish the origin of any person. "Even the election card (voting card) can be said to be sufficient proof of citizenship as while applying for the election card or a voting card, a person has to file a declaration with the authority in view of Form 6 of Peoples Representation Act to the authority that he is a citizen of India and if the declaration is found false, he is liable for punishment," the court said.

In its order reported by The Times of India, the court further said the documents submitted by the accused, Abbas Shaikh (45) and Rabiya Shaikh (40), were not rebutted by the prosecution or proven to be fake. "It is necessary to mention that the person may lie but the documents will never," the court said.https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif

The court clarified that Aadhar card, PAN card, driving licence or ration card cannot be termed as the documents proving citizenship as they are not meant for the purpose. 

 

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Sabrang

Don’t label anti-CAA protesters ‘traitors’, people bound to defend rights in a democracy: Bombay HC

Drawing on the experiences of Indians non-violently fighting unjust laws under a colonial regime during India’s struggle for Independence, the Court said that an agitation cannot be suppressed only on the ground that people are agitating against the government

15 Feb 2020

Bombay HC

Setting aside an order by the Additional District Magistrate against allowing protests in Maharashtra’s Beed, a division bench of the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court said that those protesting against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) “cannot be called traitors, anti-nationals only because they want to oppose one law”. The order was passed by justices MG Sewlikar and TV Nalawade on February 13, 2020 is an unequivocal victory for Article 19(1) which is the Right to Freedom of Assembly. It is this cardinal, fundamental principle that is guides people’s and citizens right to protest in a democracy.

The Bombay HC (Aurangabad bench) said that an agitation cannot be suppressed only on the ground that people are agitating against the government. It also asked the bureaucracy to “keep in mind” that when people believe that a “particular Act is an attack on their rights… they are bound to defend that right”. The judgement clearly underlined that it is not for the Court “to ascertain whether the exercise of such right will create a law and order problem”.

Granting relief to petitioners who were seeking permission to sit at a location for an indefinite agitation, the Court noted they had given an undertaking that no slogans would be raised against the country, any religion, or the unity and integrity of the nation.  “The submissions made show that there will be no question of disobedience of provisions of CAA by such agitation. This Court is expected to consider the right of such persons to start agitation in a peaceful way. This Court wants to express that such persons cannot be called as traitors, anti-nationals only because they want to oppose one law. It will be an act of protest and only against the government for the reason of CAA,” the division bench ruled on Thursday.

The judgement came was delivered on a petition filed by a 45-year-old Beed resident, Iftekhar Shaikh, challenging an order by a police inspector last month refusing permission for an agitation based on an order by the additional district magistrate. The Court said the order by the magistrate refers to a letter by the District SP on agitations by political parties for many causes, including against the CAA. The SP had written that such agitations could lead to a law and order problem. The order said that the agitations include those by farmers due to damaged crops, others due to increase in price of commodities, and against the CAA.

The HC held that one of the clauses of the order prevented “sloganeering, singing, beating drums”. “It can be said that though the order on face appears to be against everybody, in reality the order is against persons who want to agitate, to protest against the CAA. At present, such agitations are going on everywhere and there was no whisper of agitations of other nature in this region. Thus, it can be said that there was no fairness and the order was not made honestly,” the Court said.

It said the Constitutional validity of the CAA was being heard in the Supreme Court and hence it would not comment on it. “When we are considering a proceeding like the present one, we must keep in mind that we are a democratic republic country and our Constitution has given us rule of law and not rule of majority. When such an Act is made, some people, maybe of a particular religion like Muslims, may feel that it is against their interest and such Act needs to be opposed. It is a matter of their perception and belief and the Court cannot go into the merits of that perception or belief,” the Court said.

It said courts had to examine whether these persons have the right to agitate and oppose a law. “If the Court finds that it is part of their fundamental right, it is not open to the Court to ascertain whether the exercise of such right will create law and order problem. That is the problem of a political government. In such cases, it is the duty of the Government to approach such persons, have talks with them and try to convince them,” the Court said.

It said the authorities cannot be of the perception that only one particular community or religion had an interest in opposing the law, stating that their own order said members from all communities were agitating. “…many persons of all the communities may feel that it is against the interest of mankind, humanity or basic human values. We need to remember the Constitutional and legal history when we consider the provisions of the Constitution,” it said.

Referring to the freedom struggle and the agitation against the British led by Mahatma Gandhi, including the Khilafat Movement, the Court said the movement was in solidarity with and support to the cause of Muslims of another country, even though no Indian Muslims were affected in seeking to preserve the authority of the Ottoman Sultan.

“India got freedom due to agitations which were non-violent and this path of non-violence is followed by the people of this country till this date. We are fortunate that most of the people of this country still believe in non-violence. In the present matter also, the petitioners and companions want to agitate peacefully to show their protest,” the Court said.

It said that the bureaucracy needs to be “sensitive” in matters of dissent by giving proper training on human rights. “The bureaucracy needs to keep in mind that when citizens who believe that a particular Act is an attack on their rights which were achieved by the freedom struggle, and when it is against the provisions of the Constitution which people have given to themselves, they are bound to defend that right. If they are not allowed to do so, the possibility of use of force is always there and the result will be violence, chaos, disorder and ultimately the danger to the unity of this country,” the Court said.

It said that people from all religions supporting the minority community shows that “we have achieved fraternity to a great extent”. It said that the grounds put forward by district authorities that the agitation could lead to a possible problem of law and order cannot be considered by the court, “particularly for reason that it involves the exercise of fundamental right”.

Citizens across the country have been asserting this fundamental right to protest over the past two and a half months ever since the Modi 2.0 government passed the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019 in Parliament on December 9 and 11. This law coupled with the now to be implemented National Population Register (NPR) and National Register of Citizens (NRC) threatens a vast section of Indians who may be arbitrarily excluded from that right to have rights: citizenship!

The authorities submitted in court that permission will be given to those who want to agitate peacefully.

The entire judgement of the Bombay HC may be read here:

 

 

 

Don’t label anti-CAA protesters ‘traitors’, people bound to defend rights in a democracy: Bombay HC

Drawing on the experiences of Indians non-violently fighting unjust laws under a colonial regime during India’s struggle for Independence, the Court said that an agitation cannot be suppressed only on the ground that people are agitating against the government

Bombay HC

Setting aside an order by the Additional District Magistrate against allowing protests in Maharashtra’s Beed, a division bench of the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court said that those protesting against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) “cannot be called traitors, anti-nationals only because they want to oppose one law”. The order was passed by justices MG Sewlikar and TV Nalawade on February 13, 2020 is an unequivocal victory for Article 19(1) which is the Right to Freedom of Assembly. It is this cardinal, fundamental principle that is guides people’s and citizens right to protest in a democracy.

The Bombay HC (Aurangabad bench) said that an agitation cannot be suppressed only on the ground that people are agitating against the government. It also asked the bureaucracy to “keep in mind” that when people believe that a “particular Act is an attack on their rights… they are bound to defend that right”. The judgement clearly underlined that it is not for the Court “to ascertain whether the exercise of such right will create a law and order problem”.

Granting relief to petitioners who were seeking permission to sit at a location for an indefinite agitation, the Court noted they had given an undertaking that no slogans would be raised against the country, any religion, or the unity and integrity of the nation.  “The submissions made show that there will be no question of disobedience of provisions of CAA by such agitation. This Court is expected to consider the right of such persons to start agitation in a peaceful way. This Court wants to express that such persons cannot be called as traitors, anti-nationals only because they want to oppose one law. It will be an act of protest and only against the government for the reason of CAA,” the division bench ruled on Thursday.

The judgement came was delivered on a petition filed by a 45-year-old Beed resident, Iftekhar Shaikh, challenging an order by a police inspector last month refusing permission for an agitation based on an order by the additional district magistrate. The Court said the order by the magistrate refers to a letter by the District SP on agitations by political parties for many causes, including against the CAA. The SP had written that such agitations could lead to a law and order problem. The order said that the agitations include those by farmers due to damaged crops, others due to increase in price of commodities, and against the CAA.

The HC held that one of the clauses of the order prevented “sloganeering, singing, beating drums”. “It can be said that though the order on face appears to be against everybody, in reality the order is against persons who want to agitate, to protest against the CAA. At present, such agitations are going on everywhere and there was no whisper of agitations of other nature in this region. Thus, it can be said that there was no fairness and the order was not made honestly,” the Court said.

It said the Constitutional validity of the CAA was being heard in the Supreme Court and hence it would not comment on it. “When we are considering a proceeding like the present one, we must keep in mind that we are a democratic republic country and our Constitution has given us rule of law and not rule of majority. When such an Act is made, some people, maybe of a particular religion like Muslims, may feel that it is against their interest and such Act needs to be opposed. It is a matter of their perception and belief and the Court cannot go into the merits of that perception or belief,” the Court said.

It said courts had to examine whether these persons have the right to agitate and oppose a law. “If the Court finds that it is part of their fundamental right, it is not open to the Court to ascertain whether the exercise of such right will create law and order problem. That is the problem of a political government. In such cases, it is the duty of the Government to approach such persons, have talks with them and try to convince them,” the Court said.

It said the authorities cannot be of the perception that only one particular community or religion had an interest in opposing the law, stating that their own order said members from all communities were agitating. “…many persons of all the communities may feel that it is against the interest of mankind, humanity or basic human values. We need to remember the Constitutional and legal history when we consider the provisions of the Constitution,” it said.

Referring to the freedom struggle and the agitation against the British led by Mahatma Gandhi, including the Khilafat Movement, the Court said the movement was in solidarity with and support to the cause of Muslims of another country, even though no Indian Muslims were affected in seeking to preserve the authority of the Ottoman Sultan.

“India got freedom due to agitations which were non-violent and this path of non-violence is followed by the people of this country till this date. We are fortunate that most of the people of this country still believe in non-violence. In the present matter also, the petitioners and companions want to agitate peacefully to show their protest,” the Court said.

It said that the bureaucracy needs to be “sensitive” in matters of dissent by giving proper training on human rights. “The bureaucracy needs to keep in mind that when citizens who believe that a particular Act is an attack on their rights which were achieved by the freedom struggle, and when it is against the provisions of the Constitution which people have given to themselves, they are bound to defend that right. If they are not allowed to do so, the possibility of use of force is always there and the result will be violence, chaos, disorder and ultimately the danger to the unity of this country,” the Court said.

It said that people from all religions supporting the minority community shows that “we have achieved fraternity to a great extent”. It said that the grounds put forward by district authorities that the agitation could lead to a possible problem of law and order cannot be considered by the court, “particularly for reason that it involves the exercise of fundamental right”.

Citizens across the country have been asserting this fundamental right to protest over the past two and a half months ever since the Modi 2.0 government passed the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019 in Parliament on December 9 and 11. This law coupled with the now to be implemented National Population Register (NPR) and National Register of Citizens (NRC) threatens a vast section of Indians who may be arbitrarily excluded from that right to have rights: citizenship!

The authorities submitted in court that permission will be given to those who want to agitate peacefully.

The entire judgement of the Bombay HC may be read here:

 

 

 

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Subscribe to Rule of Law