[Assam Fake Encounters] Govt Taking Appropriate Action, PIL Based On Media Reports Without Verifying Complete Facts Not Maintainable: High Court

It was the plea of the petitioner that there were more than 80 fake encounters conducted by the Assam Police during the period from May, 2021 till the date of filing of the writ petition, resulting in the death of as many as 28 accused persons and injury being caused to more than 48.

He further alleged that even the Magisterial Inquiry conducted in some places into the cases of police encounters are in utter violation of the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Peoples’ Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and another v. State of Maharashtra and others reported in (2014) 10 SCC 635.

The petitioner also prayed the court to direct the authorities to furnish him with the copies of all the relevant FIRs and documents connected with the Police encounter cases during the period from May, 2021 to January, 2022.

Mr. D. Saikia, the Advocate General of Assam contended that the petitioner has no locus standi as he is not connected with the matter and the allegations made in the petition are not based on correct facts.

He further argued that State is not denying the incidents of police encounters in Assam over the past few months but the Government of Assam is looking into all such cases of police actions leading to death or injury of persons in police custody and if it is found that the Police personnel are guilty of any wrong doing, appropriate action would certainly be taken against them in accordance with law.

Justice Suman Shyam and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund observed:

“The petitioner has also not disputed the fact that enquiries have been conducted into the cases of police action/ encounters but according to him, the enquiry conducted by the State was not as per law and by following the guidelines laid down in the case of PUCL and Another (supra). However, there is nothing on record to substantiate the said assertion.”

The court stated that in proceedings related to multiple instances of police encounters, the petitioner has failed to point out any infirmity in the procedure adopted in any of those proceedings on the basis of the materials brought on record.

The petitioner also failed to point out as to which guideline laid down in the case of PUCL and Another has been violated, in which case and in what manner, the court said.

“Unless proper foundational facts are brought to the notice of the court, a Public Interest Litigation in such a matter cannot be maintained merely on the basis of some vague and unsubstantiated assertions.”

The court highlighted that the successive affidavits filed by the respondents and materials available on record show that FIRs have already been registered in respect of all the 171 incidents of police action and investigation is going on therefore it cannot be said that no action has been initiated by the State in these cases of police action.

“Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, it appears that having read some media reports on police actions leading to death/ injury of some accused persons in police custody, the petitioner has rushed to this court by filing the present petition, without properly verifying the complete facts. Under the circumstances, the possibility of the petitioner approaching this Court by way of this petition merely seeking some publicity cannot be entirely ruled out”, the court stated.

However, while dismissing the petition the court directed the respondents to provide all legally permissible documents to the Writ Petitioner including copies of FIRs/Final Report in connection with all the 171 cases of Police action, if the same is applied for by following the procedure prescribed by law.

Case Title: Arif Md. Yeasin Jwadder v. The State of Assam & 4 Ors.

Coram: Justice Suman Shyam and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Gau) 11 

Click Here to Read/Download Judgment