Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDIA: Jalangi police continues unabated brutality in Murshidabad district of West Bengal

INDIA: Jalangi police continues unabated brutality in Murshidabad district of West Bengal

August 31, 2006

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

31 August 2006
------------------------------------------------------
UA-283-2006: INDIA: Jalangi police continues unabated brutality in Murshidabad district of West Bengal

INDIA: Torture; intimidation; illegal detention; impunity; collapse of rule of law
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received shocking information from MASUM, a human rights organisation in West Bengal that a person was illegally taken into custody from his house by the officers from Jalangi police station and brutally tortured. It is alleged that the officers raided the house at about 3am on 28 August 2006 and arrested the victim, Mr. Bajlur Rahman. At the time of arrest Bajlur was brutally beaten up and also at the police station. Neither Bajlur nor his family was informed the reason why he was taken into custody.

Facts of the case:

On 28 August 2006, at about 3am six officers led by Mr. Tuhin Biswas, Sub Inspector of Police from the Jalangi police station raided the house of the victim. The officers who barged into the house did not inform the family whom or what they were looking for. The officers after arresting Bajlur brutally tortured him in front of his mother. He was later taken to the Jalangi police station in a police jeep. It is alleged that Bajlur was brutally tortured in the police station also.

Bajlur’s mother Mrs. Anesa Bewa tried to contact Mr. Somnath Banerjee, the officer in charge of Jalangi police station to find out why her son was tortured and what the reason for his arrest was. However, she was not provided any details by the officer. Subsequently she contacted MASUM on 30 August 2006 in the evening. On receipt of a complaint by Anesa, MASUM contacted the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police of Murshidabad. However both officers failed to provide any help or information regarding the case. Bajlur however was produced in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Murshidabad today. It is also alleged that the police has framed false charges against Bajlur to justify the arrest.

The case currently registered against Bajlur at Jalangi police station is case no. 47 of 2006 dated 28 March 2006. The complainant in this case is one Mr. Badi Mondal son of late Mr. Hakman of Prasanna Nagar village, Jalangi. There were two accused named in the original First Information Report. They are 1) Mr. Sanjay Sk of Roshan Nagar and 2) Ms. Tarangini Pramanik of Balia Danga. Both were arrested long back. There was no whisper regarding the involvement of any other accused in this case.

However, it is alleged that once MASUM intervened and on receipt of complaint from the mother of the victim, the Jalangi police have now doctored a statement of one Ms. Khusi Bibi of Pune, Maharastra state, who is also allegedly involved in a case of female trafficking to connect Bajrul in this case. It is however an anomaly that the allegedly doctored statement of Khusi Bibi is made by her while she was in custody of Jalangi police. The police have also made up a false arrest memo which is now produced in court where Khusi Bibi is made a witness to the arrest. This contradicts the purpose of the arrest memo. According to the rules framed by the Supreme Court, the witness to the arrest memo must be either a family member of the arrested person or a respectable person in the locality, for which according to the current circumstances Khusi Bibi does not qualify.

On production of Bajlur at about 3pm in court the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ms. Subrata Hazra Nee Saha has remanded Bajlur to judicial remand till 14 September 2006. Even though the Magistrate had received written complaint regarding the manner in which Bajlur was arrested and tortured in custody without being produced before the court within the stipulated time of twenty four hours, the Magistrate did not ask Bajlur whether he was arrested in the manner mentioned in the compliant and whether he was tortured by the police. The Magistrate also did not care whether Bajlur require any medical attention. This lack of action by the Magistrate also reflects the general attitude of the subordinate judiciary in India in cases of custodial violence. It also reflects how custodial violence continue unabated in India inspite of the initiative taken by the Supreme Court of India and how the Supreme Court’s directives are not implemented by the subordinate judiciary in India.

Other relevant information:

The Criminal Procedure Code 1973 of India requires the law enforcement agencies to follow certain procedures at the time of conducting a house raid. Section 47 (1) of the Code requires the police officers to inform the occupants of the house whom they are looking for and seek prior permission before entering the house. It is only when the occupants refuse permission to the police to enter and the officers believes that such refusal is to facilitate an escape of the person they seek to arrest, the officers could use force to enter the house.  However, in this case the officers barged into the house without complying with any formalities. Section 47 (2) also requires the officers entering a house where a woman resides to allow the woman to step outside the house before the search.

Section 49 of the Code prohibits use of unnecessary force during arrest. Section 50 requires the officer to inform the person arrested the reason for arrest, including the alleged offense for which the person is taken into custody.

In addition to the statutory requirements the Supreme Court of India has ruled that at the time of arrest a memo must be prepared by the arresting officer. This memo must contain the crime alleged, place, date and time of arrest and also the place to which the person would be taken to to be detained before producing the detainee before a Magistrate. The rules framed by the Supreme Court also require the officers to ask a person to witness the arrest memo.

Bajlur was arrested on 28 August, but he was produced before a Magistrate only on 31 August. Section 57 of the Criminal Procedure Code requires the police to produce the detainee before a local Magistrate within twenty four hours. In Bajlur’s case this law also was not observed. The arrest and detention of Bajlur is also against the mandates of Article 22 (1) and (2) of the Constitution of India.

This is not the first time that the AHRC has come across similar cases from India. In the past few years the AHRC has been calling upon the authorities in India to make sure that such blatant violations of law do not happen. For further information please see UA-247-2005, UA-116-2005, UA-89-2005, UA-82-2005 and UA-19-2005. The AHRC is also aware that in most cases the detainees are later released without any charge or are falsely implicated in serious offences. In Bajlur’s case he was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court Murshidabad today charged under Sections 363 and 366A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

[Section 363: Whoever kidnaps any person from India or from lawful guardianship shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine. Section 366A: Whoever, by any means whatsoever, induces any minor girl under the age of eighteen years to go from any place or to do any act with intent that such girl may be, or knowing that it is likely that she will be, forced or seduced to illicit intercourse with another person shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable with fine.]

Bajlur’s mother has also filed complaints with the Chief Judicial Magistrate Murshidabad alleging illegal detention, torture in custody and non-compliance of the law and the directives of the Supreme Court.

India has not ratified the United Nations International Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The Government of India has refrained from ratifying the Convention by arguing that the existing domestic laws are adequate to prevent torture and other inhuman treatment in the country. However, the reason why the law enforcement agencies in India are made least accountable for custodial violence is because torture is yet to be made a crime in India. This lacuna is exploited by the law enforcement agencies in India.

We call for your urgent intervention into this matter. Please send a letter to the local authorities to take appropriate action against the concerned police officers and to strictly implement domestic laws and guidelines regarding arrests and detentions so that errant police officers can be held answerable to the justice system.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please send a letter to the Chief Minister of West Bengal requesting him to order an immediate and thorough investigation into this case so that disciplinary actions are taken against the alleged perpetrators.

To support this appeal, please click:

Sample letter:

Dear _____________,

INDIA: Jalangi police continues unabated brutality in Murshidabad district of West Bengal

Name of the victim: Mr. Bajlur Rahman, aged about 32 years, son of late Mr. Surat Sk, Prasanna Nagar village, under the jurisdiction of Jalangi police station, Murshidabad district, West Bengal
Name of the alleged perpetrators: Mr. Tuhin Biswas and five other police officers from the Jalangi police station, Murshidabad district, West Bengal
Date of incident: 28 August 2006

I am writing to you requesting your immediate intervention and action against the police officers of Jalangi police station, Murshidabad district. I am informed that on 28th August 2006 the officers from Jalangi police station barged into the house of the victim and took him into custody and tortured him in front of his mother. I am also informed that the officers then took him to Jalangi police station, tortured him further and also failed to produce him before the local Magistrate within 24 hours – the time frame mandated according to the Indian law.

I am also informed that the officers did not inform the victim’s relative where the victim is been taken to and where he will be held and when he will be produced before the Magistrate. I am also aware that the officers did not inform the victim or his relatives for what offense he is been taken into custody.

I am aware that the victim has been produced before the Murshidabad Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court on 31 August 2006. I am also informed that the victim has now been charged with serious offences. However, none of these justify the illegal arrest and custodial torture. I am aware that this is not the first time incidents of similar nature are being reported from India, Jalangi in particular. If the allegations against the officers are true they have clearly violated the law and must be punished.

I therefore urge you to immediately inquire into the matter, and take appropriate actions so that if the allegations against the officers are found correct, they will be punished. I also urge you to make necessary arrangements so that the victim is provided with immediate medical care and that the perpetrators are made to pay appropriate compensation to the victim. I also urge you to take appropriate measures to pressure the Government of India to ratify the United Nations International Convention against Torture and Other cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and to come up with appropriate domestic legislation.

Sincerely


------------------------------

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee
Chief Minister/ Minister of Home Department
Government of West Bengal
Writer's Building
Kolkata - 700 001
West Bengal
INDIA
Fax: +91 33 2214 5480/ 2214 1341
Email: cm@wb.gov.in

2. Justice Mr. Y. K. Sabharwal
The Chief Justice of India
Through the Office of the Registrar General
Supreme Court of India
1 Tilak Marg, New Delhi
INDIA
Fax: 91 11 23383792
Email: supremecourt@nic.in

3. Mr. Justice A. S. Anand
Chairperson
The National Human Rights Commission of India
Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg
New Delhi -110001
INDIA
Tel: +91 11 23074448
Fax: +91 11 2334 0016
E-mail: chairnhrc@nic.in

4. The Chief Secretary
Government of West Bengal
Writers' Buildings, Kolkata - 700001
West Bengal
INDIA
Fax: +91 33 22144328
Email: chiefsec@wb.gov.in

5. The Home Secretary
Government of West Bengal
Writers' Buildings, Kolkata - 700001
West Bengal
INDIA
Fax: +91 33 22143001
Email: sechome@wb.gov.in

6. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture
Attn: Safir Syed
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9230
Fax: +41 22 917 9016 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR TORTURE)


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ahrchk@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-283-2006
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.