Status Report of SC (Supreme Court) Proceedings on fake encounter cases in Manipur

14 May 2014

Mukul Sinha, counsel for fake encounter cases in Manipur, with his wife at a press conference at Imphal

Monetary compensation relating to six cases of extrajudicial execution by police and security forces in Manipur are not paid. The National Human Rights Commission has also been informed by the Manipur Government that the Manipur cabinet has decided not to grant compensation in some cases where it has recommended monetary compensation.

Monetary compensation as recommended by the National Human Rights Commission of India (NHRC) in its camp sitting held at Imphal from 23 to 25 October 2013 relating to six cases of extrajudicial execution committed by police and security forces in Manipur are not paid by the Manipur Government. During the camp sitting, NHRC heard 46 cases including 43 cases of extrajudicial execution perpetrated by both Manipur Police Commandos and Assam Rifles. It is also to be noted that families of 3 victims who were summoned by Manipur Police were not given any opportunity to testify before the Commission.

Mentioned may be made that in January 2013, the Supreme Court has appointed a 3 member penal headed by Justice Santosh Hegde, a retired judge of Supreme Court to examine 6 cases with 7 victims of extrajudicial execution following a Writ Petition (Criminal) Number 129 of 2012 filed by Extrajudicial Execution Victim families Association, Manipur (EEVFAM) to investigate 1528 cases. EEVFAM is an organization of widows and mothers whose husband/son were executed by the state security forces in what is general known as fake encounter.

Justice Santosh Hegde Commission established that the so call encounter as claimed by the Manipur Police Commandos and Assam Rifles, which resulted in killing of 6 persons, were not genuine and the victims did not have any criminal background. During the course of hearing, the Court had asked an NHRC team to visit Manipur.

In 2 division benches camp sitting heard 46 cases which includes 3 cases which were examined by Justice Santosh Hegde Commission, the NHRC recommended monetary compensation of a sum of rupees 32 lakhs for violation of human rights in six cases of extrajudicial execution committed by Manipur Police Commandos and Assam Rifles. The 3 (three) cases which were examined by Justice Santosh Hegde Commission and the same were also heard in the camp sitting,

Question of Gallantry Award and Multiple Crimes

Major D Sreeram Kumar, who was implicated by Supreme Court appointed Commission headed by Justice Santosh Hegde in connection to the killing of Nameirakpam Gobind Meitei and Nameirakpam Nobo Meitei was also found involved in another murder case. It may be noted that on 10 June 2009, Mr. Yengkhom Krishnadas, a local contractor was kidnapped for ransom. Mr. Krishnadas dead body was found dump in an isolated area near Lilong under Thoubal District. Manipur Police officials revealed Major D Sreeram Kumar’s name as an accomplice by five accused persons in connection to the murder of Mr. Krishnadas.

Major D Sreeram Kumar is one of the only two serving Ashok Chakra awardees of the Army. He was awarded the prestigious Ashok Chakra, the highest peace time gallantry of the country in appreciation of his outstanding performance in combating militancy in Manipur on the occasion of Independence Day celebration in 2010. It is reported that Major D Sreeram Kumar is presently posted at Army War College, Mhow in Madhya Pradesh.

In another case, Jamander Hollal Haokip, a personnel of 8th Battalion of Manipur Rifles was one among five persons who had been arrested along with a huge quantity of banned drugs on 27 November 2013. It is to be reported that Jamander Hollal Haokip was earlier attached at Thoubal Police Commandos. During his tenure as Police Commando, he was found involved in more than 5 (five) fake encounter case. Jamander Hollal Haokip was also implicated in two cases by Supreme Court appointed Commission headed by Justice Santosh Hegde.

High Court

High Court under the Writ Jurisdiction entertained several cases of fake encounter in Manipur. Upon the writ petition filed by the families and under such circumstances, the court directed its lower courts, such as the court of District Judge and First Track Court, to cause an inquiry to ascertain the facts and circumstances leading to the death. The court usually grants some monetary compensation but extremely reluctant to issue necessary direction to initiate criminal investigation notwithstanding prayers by the victim’s families.

In the argument of several writ petitions including a case of 12 years school boy namely Md. Azad Khan whose case was the first case chosen to be investigated by Justice Hegde Commission following the Writ Petition (Cril) No. 129 of 2012, full bench of Manipur High Court stated that it was brought to its notice that one PIL being Writ Petition (Cril) No. 129 of 2012 involving somewhat similar point is subject matter of these bunch of writ petitions and its final adjudication is pending before the Supreme Court of India.

The Manipur High Court further stated that a broad principle which is subject matter of these bunch of writ petition is –what is the principal and measure of compensation if found payable which should be adopted for determining the compensation in cases of establishing fake encounter where one has died?

In view of this court the decision of the Supreme Court will have material on the issues arising in these writ petitions therefore in the opinion of this High Court it will be just, proper and in the interest of all parties concerned that hearing of this matter is deferred awaiting final outcome/decision of the Supreme Court decision to be rendered in the aforesaid writ Petition (Cril).

As of now there are as many as 30 numbers of writ petitions in connection to the killing in which District Judges concluded that so encounter as claimed either by Police Commando or Central Security Forces to be fake encounter are pending in the High Court awaiting the final adjudication of the Writ Petition (Cril) No. 129 of 2012.