Bhopal jailbreak case: Hearing in ‘encounter killings’ starts behind closed doors
Today in New Delhi, India
Jan 21, 2019-Monday
New Delhi
  • Humidity
  • Wind

Bhopal jailbreak case: Hearing in ‘encounter killings’ starts behind closed doors

The jailbreak on October 31 night and the encounter the following morning on a hilltop on the outskirts of Bhopal raised suspicion and a host of questions.

india Updated: Mar 02, 2017 11:37 IST
Shruti Tomar and Punya Priya Mitra
Shruti Tomar and Punya Priya Mitra
Hindustan Times, Bhopal
Bhopal jailbreak,Bhopal encounter,SIMI operative
Police personnel carry body of an alleged SIMI operative killed in an encounter on Bhopal outskirts on October 31.(Mujeeb Faruqui/HT Photo)

The judicial commission probing the jailbreak and subsequent killing of eight alleged SIMI fugitives in an encounter in Madhya Pradesh last October began hearing depositions behind closed doors on Wednesday to the disapproval of relatives of those killed.

“Everything is ‘private’ and ‘secret’ here,” lamented the father of one of the slain men, killed by police hours after they had reportedly escaped from a high-security prison in the state capital, Bhopal.

“They have not given us the copy of the FIRs of the jailbreak and the encounter or even the postmortem report. My son’s body had injury marks. How did he get them? Without these documents, our lawyers cannot argue the case,” he added on condition of anonymity.

The jailbreak on October 31 night and the encounter the following morning on a hilltop on the outskirts of Bhopal raised suspicion and a host of questions. Videos purportedly showing policemen firing at some of the undertrials as they lay on the ground triggered allegations that the shooting was staged and the killings were cold-blooded murder.

Read more: Chief minister’s ‘changing stance’ worries Muslims in MP

The state government, however, quickly applauded the policemen, with chief minister Shivraj Singh Chauhan felicitating and announcing cash awards for the officers who participated in the operation. It was only after a nationwide outcry over the manner of the killings that the cash awards were kept in abeyance and the authorities ordered a judicial probe to establish the truth.

But human rights groups constantly accused the government of dragging its feet over the investigation.

The Madhya Pradesh government set up the one-man commission headed by retired high court judge SK Pandey by an order on November 7.

Read more: SIMI encounter: ‘Physically unfit’ cop led the operation

Pandey took charge formally only on December 5 after the government allotted an office in Vindyachal Bhavan and provided him with staff, including two former judicial officers.

His initial tenure was for three months. It expired on February 7 and he has been given an extension of another six months.

Officials admitted that the commission till date has not visited the encounter site or spoken to the families of those killed. It has so far collected 5,000 pages of documents — from police, jail and forensic departments and also from lawyers of the men killed in the encounter.

Read more: How SIMI evolved from moderate students’ organisation to banned militant group

The judge’s decision to hold “in-camera” hearings have added to the exasperation of the slain men’s relatives. Some of them who came from Ujjain and Khandwa for Wednesday’s proceedings said they had little option but to hope that justice would be done.

Terms of the commission
  • Under what situation and circumstances the eight undertrial prisoners escaped from the central jail in Bhopal around midnight of October 30-31? Which officer and employee are responsible for the incident?
  • Under what situation and circumstances, and how all the eight prisoners who escaped from the jail were killed in a police encounter on October 31 at Manikheda village.
  • Whether the police action was reasonable, keeping in view the prevalent situation at the time of encounter.
  • Suggestions to prevent repetition of prisoner escape.
  • Any other subject connected to the inquiry.

Social activist Harsh Mander, however, was stronger in his reaction.

“The private hearing is absolutely wrong. It goes against democratic norms. When the state is suspected of having resorted to extra-judicial killing it is necessary to hold the hearing in public with all transparency and openness. The public needs to be reassured that the state has done the right thing, at the time when the official narrative is implausible,” he said.

Anand Mohan Mathur, a former state advocate general, said though the judge was within his rights, it was wrong to have a private hearing. “This is a public matter and the hearing should be public. It is not a family dispute that has to be settled privately,” he said.

First Published: Mar 01, 2017 19:32 IST