The Hindu : Questions over action against police official in J&K

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Aug 14, 2003

National

National

Questions over action against police official in J&K

By Praveen Swami

NEW DELHI AUG. 13. Political laurels, the Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, is starting to discover, can rapidly transform themselves into tiaras of thorns.

Last month, the Jammu and Kashmir Government announced its intention to terminate the services of the Superintendent of Police, Farooq Khan, a highly-decorated officer who set up the first anti-terrorist operations group in the State. The Government charged Mr. Khan with having played a key role in the elimination of five innocent persons at Panchalthan, near Anantnag, and with claiming that "they were terrorists responsible for the March 2000 massacre of Sikh villagers at Chattisinghpora".

The State Government also said that Mr. Khan was responsible for "tampering with the DNA tests" conducted to establish the identity of the five dead persons. The action was part of a series of well-advertised human rights initiatives, including the disbanding of the Special Operations Group, which was led at its inception by Mr. Khan.

State Government officials, however, have not been quite so enthusiastic about making public documents, now obtained by The Hindu, which show it has stumbled on a series of tripwires. The Union Government, without whose approval Mr. Khan's services cannot be terminated, believes that the Jammu and Kashmir Government does not have the evidence to justify its course of action. The Central Bureau of Investigation, which is already investigating the cases for which Mr. Khan is facing action, is angry over what it sees as the State's efforts to poach on its turf. Worst of all, the Army is incensed over the affair which, it believes, could have serious consequences for the troops engaged in counter-terrorist operations.

A Jammu and Kashmir Cabinet Sub-Committee recommended action against Mr. Khan on the basis of the Justice G.A. Kuchhai Commission of Inquiry, which was set up by the erstwhile National Conference regime to investigate an "attempt to tamper with DNA tests" on the five killed at Panchalthan. Justice Kucchai's report does seem to hold Mr. Khan responsible for the affair, although he was removed as Anantnag police chief soon after the Panchalthan killings and was under suspension when the DNA tests were conducted. Yet, Union Home Ministry officials point out that it is far from clear if the Commission's observations constitute a judicial finding. The report asserts that Mr. Khan "might have managed behind the scene that blood samples so collected turned fake by indirect means".

Indeed, the State Government's own General Administration Department felt that this triple-layered supposition was not adequate to base legal action on. N.R. Gupta, who was the Department's chief then, wrote a confidential official note pointing out that the "Commission has not been able to pin-point responsibility on a particular individual or group of individuals". Justice Kuchhai's findings, Mr. Gupta continued, were made "on the basis of presumption", and did not seem "conclusive and cogent". For reasons that are still unclear, the Justice Kuchhai Commission did not issue notice to Mr. Khan, a necessary condition-precedent for any commission of inquiry making adverse mention of any individual. As such, the Superintendent of Police did not have the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or discuss documents. While the Cabinet Sub-Committee simply ignored Mr. Gupta's memorandum, Union Home Ministry sources told The Hindu that they, however, need hard evidence before taking action.

The CBI, famously prickly about any outside interference, is also pointing to the law. Before demitting office, the National Conference regime had handed over a large set of Panchalthan-related cases to the CBI. On December 19 last year, the Mufti Mohammad Sayeed Government issued another notification, handing over investigations relating to the tampering of evidence to that organisation as well. CBI sources say that they see the DNA tampering charges as being part of a continuum, beginning with alleged attempts to destroy the bodies of the five killed in Panchalthan. "This is our case", a CBI official says, "the State Government has no business fiddling with it". The State Vigilance Commission, which the Cabinet Sub-Committee said would investigate the DNA tampering, has meanwhile written to the Government, saying that it is only empowered to handle cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act cases.

Interestingly, there are some signs that the State Government could be barking up the wrong tree. The first information report on the killings at Panchalthan was filed by 7 Rashtriya Rifles, which stated that five unidentified terrorists were killed in the course of a cordon-and-search operation. Significantly, the FIR makes no mention of police participation in the operation, evidence for which exists only in a noting made by an Assistant Sub-Inspector in his Roznamcha, or police station diary. This noting, legal experts say, is of little evidentiary value compared to the FIR, and suggests the police at best played a secondary or supportive role in the encounter. Justice Kuchhai chose not to use his powers to compel the Army officials concerned to appear before him. Indeed, none of the several investigations into the matter has recorded evidence from Army personnel who were present during the encounter.

What concerns the Army, however, is that the Cabinet Sub-Committee seems to have endorsed, without evidence, rumours fuelled by secessionist elements that it was in some way responsible for the Chattisinghpora killings. Paragraph 5 of the sub-committee report claims that the motive of the Panchalthan operation was "to mislead the Government and the public opinion at large that the killing of the 36 Sikh in Chatti Singhpora had been executed by foreign militants".

Army officials expressed outrage at the Cabinet's turn of phrase, and also dismissed claims by the relatives of the victims that they were kidnapped before being killed in a fake encounter. "Such claims are always made every time an encounter takes place," a senior 16 Corps official told The Hindu, "but please note that investigation after investigation has found not a shred of evidence".

Investigation of the Panchalthan affair was first promoted by the National Conference regime, hoping to contain the erosion of its political base in southern Kashmir.

Absence of evidence meant that its efforts went nowhere, and the People's Democratic Party was able to cash in instead. Now, it seems, events could just be headed towards completing a full circle.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National