Not Even Skeletal Remains, Ashes of N. Keshava Rao and Other Slain Maoists Given to Kin

The Wire

2 days ago

Hyderabad: Not only did the Chhattisgarh police cremate the bodies of Communist Party of India (Maoist) general secretary Nambala Keshava Rao and some others killed in the May 21 encounter in Abujhmad in the state's Narayanpur district on their own, they also refused permission to the deceased's relatives to even fetch their skeletal remains and ashes.
Judicial intervention to help the relatives' cause also went in vain.
In Keshava Rao's case, his kin also asked the police to hand over his spectacles that were recovered from the encounter site, but their request was not conceded.
Of the 28 Maoists killed in the encounter, the police handed over 20 bodies to their kin but cremated the remaining eight themselves. The eight were Kesava Rao, four people from Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, and three from Chhattisgarh.
Keshava Rao's younger brother Ramprasad told The Wire that the stock reply they got from police was that a law and order problem would emerge if they handed over the bodies or remains.
There would be a global congregation of rights activists as Keshava Rao was well known internationally. Then, a demand for the construction of a martyrs memorial would also be made. All this can lead to a law and order situation, he cited the police as saying.
It was said that the police acted on instructions from the Chhattisgarh government to check the 'hero worship' of martyrs, as this could radicalise gatherings and lead to the recruitment of cadres. There were also concerns that a crowd may want to organise a rally.
Ramprasad said the eight bodies were cremated by the police on the evening of May 26 despite orders by the Andhra Pradesh high court that they be handed over to their relatives.
He and the relatives of other slain Maoists, including Sajja Venkata Nageswara Rao – who was an editorial board member of the Awam-e-Jung publication of the Maoist party – had reached Narayanpur on May 22 with three ambulances to take the bodies with them after hearing about the encounter, but were turned away by the police as they could not produce documents to establish their relationship with the deceased.
Neither did they have Aadhaar cards, family photos or certification by the sarpanches of their respective villages in support of their claim for the bodies.
With no other option, Ramprasad and others returned to Andhra Pradesh to knock on the doors of the judiciary.
A vacation bench of the court at Amaravati, comprising Justices N. Harinath and Y. Lakshmana Rao, had disposed of two petitions on behalf of Keshava Rao and Venkata Nageswara Rao on May 24, asking their relatives to approach the Chhattisgarh police and claim the dead bodies in the wake of an assurance given by the advocate general of Chhattisgarh.
The bench made the observation after hearing arguments from both sides on the court's territorial jurisdiction.
The advocate general of Chhattisgarh, who appeared virtually, initially argued that the court was not competent to entertain the petition of the relatives as 'no cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this court'.
On the other hand, the deputy solicitor general, who also argued online on behalf of the Central Reserve Police Force that was involved in the encounter, said there could be a reason for not handing over the dead bodies as doing so could lead to a law and order situation.
Under the guise of performing final rites, there could be a procession that may further escalate the law and order problem, the deputy solicitor general argued.
Andhra Pradesh's advocate general, who was also present via videoconference, agreed with his Chhattisgarh counterpart that the high court of the latter state would have to be approached as the dead bodies were not in the custody of any state authorities within this court's remit.
However, a senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that Article 226(2) of the constitution enabled his clients to seek relief from Andhra Pradesh even though the incident occurred in Chhattisgarh.
He relied on a Supreme Court judgement that said a court can issue appropriate directions when part of a cause of action arose within the limits of the state that it adjudicated.
Without going into the issue of the court's territorial jurisdiction, the bench disposed of the petitions, recording the submission of Chhattisgarh's advocate general that the post-mortem examination of the bodies would be completed on the same day (May 24) and 'they would be handed over to their relatives later'.
Armed with the court order, Ramprasad and others went back to Narayanpur in Chhattisgarh to claim the bodies. But to their dismay, the police refused to hand over the bodies and instead offered to let them watch the cremation from a distance if they gave an undertaking giving consent to security forces to cremate the bodies.
The cremation was to take place at a burial ground for tribal people on May 26. But they refused to sign any papers and returned to proceed with their ceremonies at home.
Upon learning about the cremation, Chilaka Chandrasekhar, secretary of the Andhra Pradesh Civil LIberties Committee, filed a contempt petition in the Andhra Pradesh high court on May 27, with notices to Chhattisgarh's chief secretary and its director general of police, as well as to the inspector general of police of the Bastar region, P. Sundarraj, alleging a violation of the court's earlier order.
He prayed for action against the senior officials for going back on a promise given to the court to hand over the bodies.
But the court dismissed the case on the grounds that it cannot entertain a contempt petition for an incident that occurred in Chhattisgarh.
The submissions of the advocates general of Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh could not be attributed as an undertaking by Chhattisgarh officials, it said.
An interim application filed in the court asking the Chhattisgarh government to give the skeletal remains and ashes to the kin was also turned down during arguments on May 29.
Asked for comment, Sundarraj told The Wire that the bodies were disposed of after following due process and instructions from the executive magistrate. He did not want to elaborate further as the court had taken cognisance of the matter.
The relatives of one deceased person from Chhattisgarh expressed unwillingness to carry his mortal remains to their village, apprehending the spread of communicable diseases.
Chandrasekhar told The Wire that civil rights activist and research scholar Bela Bhatia mediated efforts by relatives to secure the bodies. It was she who learnt about the recovery of Keshava Rao's spectacles.