PUCL Bulletin,
April 2003
Delhi
University
students
protest police brutality
-- By Namami, Vijaya, And Manasi (Students of Delhi University)
To protest against the brutal and inhuman treatment meted out to the Dharna
of the Progressive Welfare Forum of the Blind (PWFB), a seminar on 'Human
Rights In Delhi University' was held at Tagore Hall in Delhi University
(DU). The Vice Chancellor, the Pro Vice Chancellor, Dean Students' Welfare,
Dean of Colleges, and the area DCP and ACP were invited to present their
respective positions on Human Rights in the University, on 21st January
2003.
However none of Delhi
University officials could find time to attend the seminar. Ms. Vimlesh
Yadav, S.H.O. Maurice Nagar represented the police department. Among the
main speakers were representative students and teacher groups who have
been functioning as watchdogs of human rights in DU. Mr. D.N. Kalia Member,
Academic Council, presided over the seminar. Sunil Kumar Mohanto, General
Secretary of Progressive Welfare Front for the Blind (PWFB) gave a verbatim
account of his movement to get relevant provisions of Persons With Disability
Act implemented in Delhi University since 17th of October 2002, when an
indefinite dharna was started in support of this demand. He also narrated
in detail the oppressions the visually impaired agitators had been facing
since 22nd December 2002, when the Delhi University authorities dismantled
the tent that had been pitched by Sunil Mohanto's organization. A detailed
description is given in the PUCL-DU report titled Jailed
for Demanding Implementation of Law, which was presented by Sarfaraz.
Uma Gupta from All India Students Association (AISA) told the house that
the police first arrested visually normal persons, which frightened the
visually impaired. She alleged that the Vice Chancellor is not talking
to them because he is guilty. Uma Gupta further accused the police of
misguiding the media. She said that the charge sheet which has photographs
of the students do not show students engaged in violence against the police.
Police is also blamed for projecting the sticks used by the visually impaired
as weapons. (In Tihar jail, the authorities put the visually impaired
in immense difficulties by taking these sticks away.) Uma added that the
authorities are snatching away the right to agitate and resolved her organization's
determination to take back this right. Suryakant, one of the arrested
persons who was on dharna at the time of dismantling of the tent said
that on the night of 21st December 2002 the toilets were closed for them
and they had no alternative but to manage till morning. Early in the morning
at 6:00 am the police force started pulling and beating up other boys
sleeping there.
They made them take
off their clothes and footwear and beat them up and told them to run away
from there. In that condition he went to Sunil Mohanto's house and from
there to police station and finally to Khalsa College where police arrested
him along with others. At police station, he was again beaten up because
the police recognized him from the dharna. He was kept in Tihar jail without
any footwear. When he was released on bail, another prisoner lent him
a pair of chappals, which he wore on the Seminar day too. Ramprasad, another
eyewitness to the incident of 22nd December said that he had just come
after taking his bath and was wearing his trousers when the police started
beating him. He was not even allowed to pick up his purse or his shirt.
He charged the SHO Maurice Nagar for being inactive.
While this narration was going on, Ms Vimlesh Yadav, the SHO Maurice Nagar
came. Obviously the audiences had a lot of questions to ask to her and
it became a tough task to make them wait for their turn. The audience
was quite upset with the word 'sympathy' which was being repeatedly used
by the authorities towards their cause. Keshav asked the SHO that, what
had the visually impaired done that they were charged U/s 147/148/149/186/353/308
of the IPC? Sunil Mohanto pointedly asked the SHO that, how come Manohar
Lal's injuries became so serious that he had to be admitted in the ICU?
Because he (Sunil Mohanto is partially blind) saw Mr. Manohar Lal's head
bandaged at Khalsa College when he (Manohar Lal) hit Sunil Mohanto in
the legs and even had bandaged head at Maurice Nagar police Station when
he, with Mr. Sanjeev Parmar Additional SHO Maurice Nagar, was beating
Sunil Mohanto and four other students belonging to AISA. Sunil also pointed
out that the chargesheet, which has photographs of these students, does
not carry any photograph of visually challenged hitting police personnel
with lathis. Students also demanded disciplinary action against Additional
SHO Mr. Sanjeev Parmar.
They were at a loss to understand how a handful of them (about 87) that too, visually impaired could not be handled by a big police force belonging to Maurice Nagar, Timarpur, and Civil Lines police Stations. They opined that the police version of the story that 16 policemen were injured, two of them seriously in the scuffle with these 89 visually impaired, shows that the police in Delhi was not capable of handling sensitive security problems of the National Capital Region of Delhi. It was suggested that if the visually impaired could handle the police so effectively than the police jobs should go to the visually impaired. They also asked whether the visually impaired were charged U/s 308 because the police personnel got beaten up by them. One of the arrested persons mentioned that, in his whole life he has not even scratched any person with his fingernail. But the police had charged him U/s 308 isn't it the police which converts innocent men into terrorist by arresting and putting them behind the bars under such sections.
The SHO was also asked that, if the police personnel received such serious injuries why was MLC not done? Manjula Gulati pointedly asked whether the police had orders to beat up and arrest these persons. The students were amused with the SHO's reiteration that she was sympathetic to their cause and that this is why the visually impaired were booked only U/s 308. The SHO also said that she had been in constant touch with the persons sitting on dharna. To this she was asked as to why her police force did not provide any protection to those who were peacefully sitting on dharna. The SHO told the house that the University authorities and not the Delhi police dismantled the tent. As the University authorities foresaw law and order problem while dismantling the tent and removing the visually impaired, they had requested for the presence of the police force to control the situation. Her admission virtually implied that the police was there to protect the university authorities from the visually impaired not vice versa.
This really upset
the audience. Uma Gupta of AISA asked her how come the police were to
protect only the authorities and not the students? She also asked the
SHO that why didn't the police intervene when the University authorities
were violating the human rights of the persons with disability?
Dr. Uma Chakravarty felt that police used different sections of IPC in
convicting different classes of protesters. She wondered whether anti
Mandal agitators who often became violent and destroyed properties worth
millions of rupees were also convicted under section 308 of the IPC. Navin
from the Democratic Students Union (DSU) highlighted his organization's
stand on violations of human rights in Delhi University. Mr. N.D. Pancholi
gave many instances of Delhi University authorities insensitivity to the
violation of human rights within the campus. He quoted the recent instance
of Jordanian Ph.D. student who had to leave the hostel because he incurred
the wrath of the fundamentalist forces in the campus. He also gave instances
of police violating human rights of the innocent people. In this context
he also referred to the recommendations of the police Commission and the
successive government's refusal to implement these recommendations. He
further added that Article 19 of our Constitution gives every Indian citizen
the right to assemble peacefully anywhere. To close the seminar, Mr. Dayal
Singh Pawar gave a vote of thanks