Latest news with #AHRC
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
SC asks AHRC to probe Assam ‘fake encounters'
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the Assam Human Rights Commission (AHRC) to conduct an independent and expeditious probe into 171 alleged fake police encounters in the state that resulted in 56 deaths and 145 injuries between May 2021 and August 2022. A bench of justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh reinstated complaints before the AHRC that had been stalled since January 2022, emphasising that 'fair and impartial inquiry' was essential to ensure justice for victims and uphold the rule of law. The court's intervention came after the Gauhati High Court dismissed a petition seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe in January 2023. The AHRC had earlier refused to examine the complaints citing the pending high court hearing. Lawyer Arif Mohammad Yeasin Jwadder filed the petition alleging that Assam police violated Supreme Court guidelines established in the 2014 People's Union for Civil Liberties v State of Maharashtra case. The PUCL judgment mandated magisterial inquiries following encounter deaths, FIR registration, and forensic examination of weapons. The Assam government acknowledged before the high court that 171 police encounters occurred during the specified period, resulting in 56 deaths—including four custodial deaths—and 145 injuries. Petitioner's advocate Prashant Bhushan argued that procedural safeguards were violated, citing instances where FIRs were registered against victims, investigations were conducted by police from the same state or district, and ballistic reports were not obtained in all cases. Justice Kant, who authored the judgment, noted that while some of the petitioner's allegations appeared 'factually incorrect or incomplete,' the gravity of issues involving Article 21 fundamental rights required meaningful enforcement of procedural safeguards. 'The principle of fairness, which is the bedrock of all just legal processes, mandates that any inquiry into the alleged excesses must be independent and insulated from institutional bias,' the bench stated. The court directed the AHRC to issue public notices inviting victims and family members to come forward; publish notices in at least one national English daily and a prominent vernacular newspaper; preserve victim confidentiality; and engage serving or retired police officers of 'impeccable integrity' for deeper probes if required, provided they outrank those under investigation. The state, represented by solicitor general Tushar Mehta and additional advocate general Nalin Kohli, was ordered to provide access to records, forensic resources, and remove institutional barriers hindering the AHRC's functioning. The Assam State Legal Services Authority was directed to provide legal assistance to victims, while the petitioner was permitted to assist the AHRC if engaged by victims. The court also set aside the high court's earlier order, resolving jurisdictional issues that had prevented the matter from proceeding. The court clarified that its order should not be seen as finding 'mala fides or institutional bias' against the state. It refused to issue broad directives for independent probes, stating that 'broad-brush directives without individual scrutiny could result in miscarriage of justice.' The bench noted that the AHRC, headed by a retired chief justice of the Gauhati High Court, was well-positioned to conduct the inquiry with 'sensitivity, impartiality, and diligence.' Jwadder welcomed the verdict, calling it a 'legal milestone' and a moment of hope for ordinary citizens seeking justice. 'This is a step towards justice for those voiceless families who have suffered silently, whose sons were shot and labelled without trial, without proof, without remorse,' he said. While his petition sought a CBI or Special Investigation Team probe, Jwadder said handing the matter to an independent constitutional body would help truth emerge. 'No one wearing a uniform should feel empowered to take a life without fearing the consequences. This fight will go on not just in the courtroom, but in the conscience of the nation,' he added. HT reached out to the Assam government and the Opposition but did not get a comment. (With inputs from Utpal Parashar)
Time of India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Probe 171 alleged fake encounters in 2021: SC to Assam rights panel
Supreme Court NEW DELHI: The SC on Wednesday asked the Assam Human Rights Commission (AHRC) to inquire into 171 alleged incidents of fake encounters carried out by state police in 2021 but said barring a few incidents the PIL petitioner's claim about fake encounters appeared to be speculative. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh disposed of a petition by an advocate Arif M Y Jwadder and said, "We direct the AHRC to issue a public notice inviting all individuals who claim to be aggrieved (victims and their family members) by the alleged police encounters to come forward and furnish relevant evidence." Allowing AHRC to select team of police officials unconnected to the encounters for further inquiry into some cases if the need be, the bench said "fair and impartial inquiry" is a right of citizens aggrieved by police action and expected AHRC to adopt robust measures akin to witness protection protocols to safeguard the privacy, safety and security of those participating in the inquiry process. The state, in its counter-affidavit had said that out of a total of 171 cases, chargesheets have been filed in 125 cases, forwarding reports submitted in 23 cases, and remaining 23 cases are under investigation. Writing the judgment and examining the allegations of the petitioner, Justice Kant said that he has failed to independently place on record any cogent or verifiable material to substantiate the allegations. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Switch to UnionBank Rewards Card UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo Justice Kant said, "After minutely scanning such data, prima facie it seems that barring a few cases, it is difficult to infer that there has been a procedural breakdown, or the guidelines (relating to encounter inquiry) were flagrantly violated. " Referring to the status report relating to each FIR furnished by Assam, the bench said, "These documents prima facie belies the (petitioner's) claim of inaction and do establish that, at least at the foundational level, the criminal process was duly initiated. "
Hans India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Hans India
SC orders Assam human rights body to enquire into ‘fake' encounters
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the Assam Human Rights Commission (AHRC) to enquire into the allegations of "fake" encounters in the state. A Bench headed by Justice Surya Kant set aside the decision passed by the full Bench of the AHRC in January 2022 which had disposed of the issue of alleged fake encounters in the state on the pretext that the same was sub-judice before the Gauhati High Court. 'The matter is directed to be reinstated on the Board of the AHRC for necessary enquiry into the allegations independently and expeditiously, in accordance with law,' ordered the Bench, also comprising Justice N.K. Singh. The apex court directed the AHRC to issue a public notice inviting all aggrieved individuals (victims and their family members) to come forward and furnish relevant information or evidence before the state human rights body. 'The notice shall be published in at least one national English daily and one prominent vernacular newspaper with wide circulation throughout the State of Assam. The publication of such a notice shall be carried out in a manner that is accessible and understandable to the general public, including those residing in remote and conflict-prone areas,' it ordered. The Justice Kant-led Bench told AHRC to adopt robust measures akin to witness protection protocols to safeguard the privacy, safety and security of those participating in the process. 'We trust that the AHRC will proceed with the highest degree of sensitivity, impartiality, and diligence, thereby reinforcing public faith in the institutional mechanisms for protecting human rights,' said the top court. Further, it ordered the Assam government to extend full cooperation to the AHRC and ensure that all logistical, financial, and administrative requirements for such an investigation are promptly and adequately met. The apex court directed the state government to provide access to records, facilitate the availability of forensic and expert resources, and remove any institutional barriers that may hinder the functioning of AHRC. Earlier in January 2023, the Gauhati High Court had dismissed the appellant's Public Interest Litigation (PIL) alleging that as many as 80 fake encounters took place in Assam, between May 2021 and December 2021, and during these encounters, 28 people were killed and 48 were left injured. The PIL had sought records of all alleged fake encounters in Assam, registration of FIRs against the erring police officials and an independent investigation against such officials in compliance with the guidelines laid down by the apex court in the case of People's Union for Civil Liberties vs. State of Maharashtra. Though, the Gauhati High Court held that the PIL was premature and the documents placed on record only made out vague assertions, it had directed that the appellant will be provided all legally-permissible documents in connection with all such cases, if so applied.
Hindustan Times
4 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
SC directs Assam rights panel to investigate alleged extrajudicial killings
The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Assam Human Rights Commission (AHRC) to investigate a series of alleged extrajudicial killings in the northeastern state, saying the use of excessive or illegal force cannot be justified. It overturned a January 2022 AHRC decision to close a case on the alleged extrajudicial killings, citing a pending plea on the issue in the Gauhati high court. A bench of justices Surya Kant and N Kotishwar Singh directed the commission to reconsider the matter and conduct the probe, including into allegations of injuries in extrajudicial police action, popularly known as encounters. It asked the AHRC to approach the matter with sensitivity and the Assam government to cooperate fully and remove any institutional barriers. Lawyer Arif Jwadder moved the Supreme Court over the alleged extrajudicial killings after the high court rejected his plea seeking action. His plea alleged 171 fake 'encounters' between May 2021, when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) returned to power with Himanta Biswa Sarma as the chief minister, and August 2022. In January 2023, the high court said people were killed and injured in police action, but the state government had registered first information reports to probe them. Jwadder's petition said 54 people were killed and 140 injured in police action. The Supreme Court directed the AHRC to issue public notices in English and local newspapers to inform all concerned parties about the probe, ensuring affected families are heard. It said the AHRC may additionally appoint independent members to assist in this process. 'The state government is ordered to provide full forensic support and necessary resources to the commission, while also eliminating any administrative obstacles that might hinder their investigation,' the court said. Jwadder welcomed the Supreme Court verdict, calling it a legal milestone. '...this is a moment of hope for every ordinary citizen who dares to believe that justice is still possible.' He said the Supreme Court's order reaffirms a simple yet powerful idea. '...that every human life matters, and no authority is above the Constitution.' He added that his plea sought a Central Bureau of Investigation or a Special Investigation Team probe, but handing the matter to an independent constitutional body opens the door for the truth to come out. 'It is a step toward justice for those voiceless families who have suffered silently, whose sons were shot and labeled without trial, without proof, without remorse. This case is not about politics. It is about people and mothers still waiting, children still asking, and a society that must never grow numb to bloodshed carried out in its name.' Jwadder vowed to continue standing by and speaking for the victims until accountability is delivered. 'No one wearing a uniform should feel empowered to take a life without fearing the consequences. This fight will go on not just in the courtroom, but in the conscience of the nation.'
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Supreme Court asks Assam Human Rights Commission to inquire into alleged fake encounters in state
The Supreme Court Wednesday asked the Assam Human Rights Commission (AHRC) to inquire into allegations of fake police encounters in the state 'for advancing it to its logical conclusion' after a petitioner pointed to as many as 171 such incidents. Deciding a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N K Singh noted that 'after minutely scanning' the 'data' placed before it by the petitioner, 'prima facie it seems that barring a few cases, it is difficult to infer that there has been a procedural breakdown or the PUCL guidelines were flagrantly violated.' 'The records furnished by the state themselves indicate that some instances may warrant further evaluation to ascertain whether the guidelines laid down in PUCL have been meticulously complied with in both letter and spirit,' the bench added, and decided to entrust the inquiry to AHRC. The SC set aside the January 12, 2022, order passed by a full bench of AHRC disposing of the issue, and directed that the matter be reinstated on the board of the Commission 'for necessary inquiry into the allegations, independent and expeditiously in accordance with law.' The court noted, 'It has come to our knowledge that the…The Commission is now headed by an erudite jurist who is a retired chief justice of the High Court, whose judicial acumen and integrity inspire confidence. This court has every reason to believe that under his stewardship, the state human rights commission will decide the duties with diligence, sensitivity, and an abiding commitment to the constitutional values.' In the 1996 People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) judgement, the top court laid down guidelines against arbitrary state action, reaffirming the primacy of the rule of law as the bedrock of India's constitutional democracy. The guidelines laid down by the court provided for registration of FIR, independent investigation, magisterial inquiry, involving forensic science, informing the next of kin, compensation, and information to the National Human Rights Commission, and the state human rights commission, among others. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court underlined the importance of the human rights commissions in protecting vulnerable groups, ensuring accountability, and strengthening institutional mechanisms for enforcing human rights. 'The domestic human rights architecture in India is supported by a robust statutory framework that complements the constitutional guarantees enshrined in part three and the directive principle of state policy… At the centre of this framework stands the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, which institutionalised the commitment of the Indian state to uphold and monitor human rights in a structured and independent manner. The act serves as the primary statutory instrument for the promotion and protection of human rights in India,' said the court. The court pointed out that its judgement in the extrajudicial execution victims case 'has rightly underscored the roles of the human rights commissions such as that of protector, adviser, monitor, and educator of human rights'. 'Applying this understanding of the human rights framework to the instant matter, we have no hesitation in holding that the role of the human rights commission both at the national and state level is paramount in a democratic polity governed by the rule of law.' 'In a country as vast and diverse as India, marked by complex sociopolitical dynamics and systemic inequities, these commissions provide an essential form of accountability, transparency, and remedy against human rights violations.' The court noted that though the petitioner had brought a compilation of as many as 171 incidents before it, 'however…mere compilation or aggregation of cases does not by itself call for omnibus judicial directions.' 'Issuance of broad brush directives without individual scrutiny could result in a miscarriage of justice either by shielding the guilty or by stigmatising legitimate action by public servants discharging their duty under challenged circumstances,' added the court.
