PUCL Bulletin, Feb., 2001
Is
their any hope of justice?
Hashimpura (Meerut) Killings by the PAC
-- By Iqbal A. Ansari, Secretary-General, Minorities Council
The following account of
the proceedings in the courts in the Hashimpura case will be helpful to those
who are monitoring / researching on the functioning of the criminal justice
system, the statutory commissions and the human rights and community organisations
in India.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad continued issuing bailable and then
non-bailable warrants against the 19 PCA men who faced charges of murdering40
Muslims of Hashimpura (Meerut) in 1987, twenty three times between January 1997
and April 2000. They were never arrested and produced before the court, though
all along this period they were in active service with known postings and residential
addresses. At the end of May and early June 2000, sixteen of them surrendered
and got bail. The trial court fixed dates in September and October 2000 for
framing of charges. For which the Govt. counsel was not prepared. On 13 December
the CBC ID submitted that it wanted time for appointing a Special Public Prosecutor.
The case has adjourned for 25 January 2001.
This sequence of legal proceedings can hardly inspire confidence in the aggrieved
parties and the public that justice will be done in the case. Following are
the facts of the case.
1. On 22 May 1987 during curfew in Meerut in the State of U.P. The Provincial
Armed Constabulary (PAC) picked up several hundred innocent Muslims mostly youth,
from their homes and took them away in trucks, while there was no rioting in
that area of the city. A few days later about forty dead bodies of some of those
arrested were found floating in the upper Ganga Canal in Murad Nagar, District
Ghaziabad (U.P.).
2. Inquiry reports by reputed journalists like Nikhil Chakravartty and, Kuldip
Nayar, and organisations like the People's Union For Civil Liberties (PUCL)
and the People's Union For Democratic Rights (PUDR) revealed that it was a case
of barbaric cold-blooded murder by the PAC personnel. Nikhil Chakravartty compared
the event with "Nazi Pogrom against the Jews, to strike terror and nothing
but terror in a whole minority Community". The Amnesty International's
inquiry report observed, " There is evidence to suggest that members of
the PAC have been responsible for dozens of extra judicial killings and disappearances".
(AI Index: ASA 20/06/87)
2.1 In a joint statement eminent persons including I.K. Gujral, Rajindar Sachar,
Kuldip Nayar, Subhadra Joshi and Badr-Ud-Din Tyabji demanded, " the government
must prosecute all those who have disgraced their uniform. Their misdeeds must
treated at par with treason and tried by special Courts".
3. The Govt. of U.P. ordered an inquiry into the ghastly incident by the CNCID.
A thorough Inquiry Report was submitted by CNCID in Feb. 1994 in which 666 PAC-Police
personnel of all ranks were indicted.
4. A Writ Petition (No. 1379 of 1995 MIB) was filed by Jamaluddin and others
of Meerut on 15 Feb. 1995 before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court
for making the Report public, prosecuting all those indicted and payment of
adequate compensation to victims.
5. The Govt. of U.P. filed cases against only 19 PAC men of lower rank in the
Court of CJM Ghaziabad on 20 May 1996 u/s 374/307/302/201 of the I.P.C. (Case
No. 1267/96).
6. In the counter-affidavit filed on 13 March 1997 in the High Court the CNICD
admitted that "the remaining detenues were taken in the PAC truck URU 1493
to the Hindu Canal (Village Makanpur) and the Platoon Commander and PAC men
shoot them dead". Para 10 of the affidavit states, " it is submitted
that the incident and human right violations not denied".
7. In spite of this background of admission of guilt, the following is the sequence
of proceedings in the law courts at Ghaziabad from May 1996 till October 2000.
i) The accused were never arrested and produced before the Court, although they
were all along serving members of the PAC whose posting and home addresses were
known even after issuance of bailable warrants six times between 31 January
1997 and 16 February 1998 and of non-bailable warrants 17 times between 20 April
1998 and 29 April 2000 by the CJM Ghaziabad. On 16 Feb. 1999 the CJM had also
ordered for proceedings to be taken against the accused U/S 82/83 Cr. P.C. for
declaring them
absconders and for confiscation of their properties.
ii) During those five years of the pendency of the case of the case the lack
of will on the part of the successive Govts. of U.P. is matched by equal lack
of interest by the Muslim organisations, the Human Rights groups and the media.
iii) Things, however, started moving after this write personally visited Meerut
and Ghaziabad in May 1999 to collect papers related to the case. Subsequently
in a meeting convened by the Minorities Council on 7 July 1999 a decision easy
taken that the Council in cooperation with other organisations willing to lend
support, including article under the title FORGOTTEN MASSACRES on Hashimpura
case from 1987 till August 1999 in
the Autumn 1999 issue of the quarterly IOS Bulletin Human Rights today that
I edit, which made some impact and led to Siddharth Vavadarajan of the times
of India taking interest in the case, who published from page story in the Times
of India of 17 May 2000 on the bizarre proceedings in the CJM Ghaziabad court.
That was the time when on our representation, the NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR MINORITIES
(NCM) impressed upon the union Home Minister and the govt. of U.P. to take early
measures for payment
of adequate compensation and speedy trial. This pressure from the! Minorities
Council, the NCM and the times of India seems to have forced the U.P. Govt.
to realise that it could no longer shield the guilty PAC men.
iv) As a consequence of this pressure, 16 of the 19 accused PAC men surrendered
in groups in the last week of May 2000 and early June 2000. They were refused
bail by CJM, Ghaziabad. However they were allowed bail by District Judge Shir.
R.P. Mishra on the ground that there was no direct evidence against them and
that being members of the PAC there was no chance of their absconding. Apparently
their practically being absconders from January 1997 to May 2000 did not weigh
with the learned Court while easily allowing bail to all 16 in groups on 2 June
2000 (Bail Application No. 1353/2000); 5 June 2000 (No. 1412/2000); 27 June
2000 (No. 1564/2000) and 4 July 2000 (No. 1620/2000).
v) None of the 16 accused PAC men have been suspended from service, On 11 July
2000 the case against these 16 accused PAC men was committed to District Judge
for trial, who transferred the case to the Additional District Sessions Judge
(iv) (Room No. 204) as case No. ST 1362/2000. The case has been adjourned three
times for framing of charges against the accused. Charges, however, have not
yet been framed. The following
order was passed by the learned court. "30.10.2000 for charge. Sd/. Additional
Sessions judge". On 13 December 2000 the plea of the CBCID the case has
been adjourned for 25 January 2001.
vi) The entire sequence of legal proceedings since the submission of the CBCID
Report in February 1994 till date has been rightly summed up by Siddharth Varadarajan
of Times of Indian in the following words: "Even by the lethargic and Kafkaesque
standards of the Indian judicial system, the Hashimpura case is in a class of
its own" (TOI, 17 May 200). Such is the apathy in the Human Rights movement,
the press, and legislators that except for the UP PUCL President Ravi Kiran
Jain's filing of PIL in the Allahabad High Court in May 2000, no one made it
serious public issue even after the publication of the story in the Times of
India. The surrendering of 16 accused PAC men and their easily getting bail
and the Govt. Sessions not being in a position to get charges framed in September
- October and the Additional District Sessions Judge (IV) strangely passing
order that 13 Dec. 2000 is being fixed as last chance for framing charges, did
not become news in national, regional or local newspapers. The Time of India,
however, after our briefing again published a detailed story on 11 December
2000.
vii) Maulvi Mohd. Yasmeen and others of Meerut had approached the National Commission
for Minorities (NCM) through their representation of 2/4/1997 on which no action
was taken. Subsequently after the Minorities Council's representation of 8 March
1999 and persistent reminders impressing upon the Chairman the gravity and uniqueness
of the case, the Deputy Secretary NCM addressed a letter to the Chief Secretary
Govt. of U.P on 12/10/99, which was not further pursued.
The present Chairman, however promptly advised the Govt. of U.P. for speedy
trial in May 2000, but did not monitor the progress as had been requested by
the Minorities Council.
viii) It needs to be noted that at my instance the NCM has requisitioned as
official copy of the CBCID Report on Hashimpura killings. In its latest letter
of 27 November to Chairman NCM, the Minorities Council has urged the Chairman
to intervene effectively in the case. Being a case of custodial killing, the
Minorities Council sent a representation to the National Human Rights Commission
on 2/8/2000, which has remained unacknowledged till date.
Is there any hope that members of State Forces guilty of crimes against humanity
shall be brought to justice and the next of kin of those killed will get adequate
compensation? The Govt. of U.P. maintains that the amount of Rs. 40,000/- it
paid for each of those killed is enough. It needs to be kept in mind that Hashimpura's
is a case of custodial killings by PAC, not that of killings during riots because
of failure of governance as in 1984 in Delhi for which the Delhi High Court
awarded compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs.