Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Madan B. Lokur, Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ.
Extra Judl. Exec. Victim Families Assn. & Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO. 129 OF 2012 WITH WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 445 OF 2012
Decided On : 14-07-2017
(b) Fake Encounters – High Court at Gauhati entertaining writ petitions into allegations of death of 37 persons – Two petitions pending – High Court requested to expeditiously dispose of the same – One petition dismissed by High Court – Specific information about two petitions not available – Investigating team that we propose to appoint to ascertain the correct factual position – High Court granting compensation in remaining writ petitions – FIRs directed to be registered. (Para 9, 10, 11, 12)
(1998) 2 SCC 109 – Relied upon
(c) Fake encounters – Complaints before NHRC – 20 cases reported to NHRC – 7 complaints pending – NHRC requested to take decision – No specific information available about two complaints – Investigating team to ascertain position – NHRC awarding compensation in remaining cases – FIRs directed to be registered in such cases. (Para 13, 14, 15)
(d) Fake encounters – Six complaints considered by Justice Santosh Hegde Commission – FIRs directed to be registered in all six cases. (Para 17)
(e) Criminal jurisprudence – A crime involving death of a possibly innocent person cannot be over-looked only because of a lapse of time – More so when a Constitution Bench of Supreme Court laid down the law in this regard – State ought to conduct suo motu thorough inquiry – State cannot take advantage of the delay to scuttle an inquiry. (Para 18)
(f) Administration of justice – Next of kin of deceased in many cases not approaching courts – Third parties taking up the cause and filing PILs – No illegality in entertaining such petitions. (Para 21)
(g) Fake encounters – Compensation vis-à-vis prosecution – Compensation awarded to next of kin to immediately tide over their loss and for their rehabilitation – This cannot override law of the land – If allowed, all heinous crimes would get settled through payment of monetary compensation. (Para 22)
(h) Fake encounters – Constitution of special investigating team – No FIR registered against Manipur Police or any uniformed personnel of the armed forces of the Union – Instead, FIRs lodged against deceased persons – Manipur police cannot be depended upon for impartial investigation – Director CBI directed to nominate a group of five officers to go through the records of the cases mentioned hereinabove, lodge necessary FIRs and to complete the investigations into the same by 31st December, 2017 and prepare charge sheets, wherever necessary. (Para 24, 26)
(2013) 15 SCC 578; (1994) Supp. 1 SCC 143 – Relied upon
(i) Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 – NHRC – NHRC playing roles of protector, advisor, monitor and educator of human rights – Guidelines issued by NHRC need to be strictly enforced but being ignored – Has most unfortunately been reduced to a toothless tiger – a (Para 32, 38, 44)
(2010) 14 SCC 209 – Relied upon
(j) Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 – Section 11 – Central Government obliged to provide adequate staff to NHRC. (Para 41)
Facts of the case:
Allegations have been made that 1528 persons had been killed in fake encounters by police personnel and personnel in uniform of the armed forces of the Union in Manipur.
The allegations are sought to be substantiated by a tabular statement.
Finding of the court:
Guidelines of NHRC need to be enforced.
Result: Directions given.
JUDGMENT
Madan B. Lokur, J.
1. In the present petitions, the allegation was that 1528 persons had been killed in fake encounters by police personnel and personnel in uniform of the armed forces of the Union. By our judgment and order dated 8th July, 2016, (2016) 14 SCC 578 (2) we respectfully followed the view laid down by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights v. Union of India, (1998) 2 SCC 109. The Constitution Bench held that an allegation of use of excessive force or retaliatory force by uniformed personnel resulting in the death of any person necessitates a thorough enquiry into the incident. We were of opinion that even the ‘Dos and Don’ts’ and the ‘Ten Commandments’ of the Chief of Army Staff believe in this ethos and accept this principle. However, after considering the submissions at law, we found that the documentation was inadequate to immediately order any inquiry into the allegations made by the petitioners and therefore directed them to complete the documentation indicating whether the allegations were based on any judicial enquiry or an enquiry conducted by the National Human Rights Commission or an enquiry conducted under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952.
2. A tabular statement has since been filed by learned counsel for the petitioners and this statement has been accepted by learned Amicus and no objection was raised by the Union of India or by the State of Manipur. We therefore proceed on the basis of the tabular statement before us.
3. The petitioners have been able to gather information with regard to 655 deaths out of 1528 alleged in the writ petitions. The break-up is as follows:
| Sl. No. | PARTICULARS | No. of cases |
| 1. | Commission of Inquiry cases | 35 |
| 2. | Judicial Inquiry and High Court cases | 37 |
| 3. | NHRC cases | 23 |
| 4. | Cases with written complaint | 170 |
| 5. | Cases with oral complaint | 78 |
| 6. | Cases with eye witnesses | 134 |
| 7. | Family claimed cases | 178 |
4. We have perused the tabular statement given with regard to cases with written complaints, oral complaints and eye-witness accounts as well as family claimed cases but find that apart from a simple allegation being made, no substantive steps appear to have been taken by either lodging a First Information Report (FIR) or by filing a writ petition in the concerned High Court or making a complaint to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). The allegations being very general in nature, we do not think it appropriate to pass any direction for the time being in regard to the cases concerning these written complaints, oral complaints, cases with eye-witness accounts and family claimed cases. It is not that every single allegation must necessarily be inquired into. It must be remembered that we are not dealing with individual cases but a systemic or institutional response relating to constitutional criminal law.
Deaths investigated by Commissions of Inquiry
5. With regard to 35 deaths dealt with in reports given by Commissions constituted under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 we find that two of the deaths: in respect of L.D. Rengtuiwan and N. Sanjita Devi were not mentioned in the writ petition. We pass no orders in respect of these two cases.
6. As far as the death of Thangjam Manorama is concerned, the issues are pending in this Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 65-69 of 2015 and therefore we make no comment in this regard.
7. As far as the remaining 32 deceased victims are concerned, we find that independent Commissions of Inquiry have made adverse comments against personnel of the Manipur Police and the Central Reserve Police force (as the case may be) for the use of excessive force or retaliatory force. In our opinion, more than a prima facie case is made out for lodging an FIR in the appropriate police station in respect of the death of these 32 persons. We direct the registration o
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
