Accused Losing Lives Like This Not Good For 'Rule Of Law' : Supreme Court In Plea Against 'Fake' Encounters In Assam

While hearing a special leave petition raising the issue of fake encounters in Assam, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan of the Supreme Court remarked today that accused persons losing their lives in the alleged manner is "not good for the rule of law".

"...it is not a good thing for rule of law that so many accused are just losing their lives like that!", said the judge.

Justice Bhuyan, part of a bench comprising Justice Surya Kant as well, was hearing a special leave petition filed against a Gauhati High Court order, whereby the petitioner's PIL raising the same issue was dismissed. Reportedly, the High Court was of the view that no separate probe into the alleged incidents was required, as state authorities were conducting investigation in each case.

The matter has been adjourned till October 22 to enable the Assam government to place on record its latest counter-affidavit.

Pertinently, during the hearing, Justice Kant reiterated that the Court intends to form a commission and asked the parties to suggest names of retired judges for the purpose.

At one point, Additional Advocate General for Assam Nalin Kohli submitted that no police personnel alleged to be involved in an encounter has been promoted. However, Justice Bhuyan was quick to observe that it is not a good thing for rule of law that various accused persons are losing their lives "just like that".

The plea is filed by one Arif Md Yeasin Jwadder, an advocate from Assam, raising the issue of encounters by state police in Assam. The petitioner claims that more than 80 fake encounters took place between Assam police and persons accused in different cases since May 2021 (when Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma took charge). He seeks an enquiry by an independent agency, like the CBI, SIT or a police team from other states.

Notice was issued on the petition on July 17 last year, calling for the response of the National Human Rights Commission and Assam Human Rights Commission, besides the Assam government.

In April, the Court suggested that the petitioner place on record some additional information. Pursuant to the same, he is stated to have filed the affidavits of victims of Tinsukia encounter case, in which three persons (Deepjyoti Neog, Biswanath Burgohain and Manoj Buragohain) were allegedly injured in police firing.

The petitioner states that family members of two victims of the Tinsukia encounter case viz. Biswanath and Manoj had wanted to lodge a missing persons report. But, the officer-in-charge of the concerned police station refused to lodge the complaint unless they mentioned that the victims were going to join the banned militant organization-ULFA. Rather, an FIR was lodged against the victims after the encounter took place.

It is also alleged that the officer-in-charge of Police Station Dholla (Assam) appointed himself as an Investigating Officer in the case, even though he was present at the scene of the encounter and it was his pistol that was allegedly snatched by victim-Deepjyoti Neog.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared for the petitioner.

Case Title: ARIF MD YEASIN JWADDER Versus THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS., SLP(Crl) No. 7929/2023