Back
2014 Supreme(Manipur) 137
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
Laxmi Kanta Mohapatra, N.Kosiwar Singh, JJ.
Thiyam Ongbi Tanoubi Leima - Appellant
Versus
State of Manipur - Resopndent
Writ Petition (Cril) No. 68 of 2009
Decided On : 11-09-2014
For the Appellant :M. Rakesh, Advocate
For the Respondents: Y. Ashang, GA & Amarjit Naorem, CGSC
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's invocation of the principle of constitutional court remedy to award compensation for the human rights violation, highlighting the responsibility of the Assam Rifles in the fake encounter.
Headnote:
Fake Encounter - Human Rights Violation - UA(P) A Act 2004, Arms Act - The court discussed the testimonies of witnesses, the lack of evidence of an encounter, and the responsibility of the Assam Rifles in the death of the petitioner's son. The court invoked the principle of constitutional court remedy to award compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs to the petitioner for the human rights violation.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's son was allegedly killed in a fake encounter by a combined team of the Manipur Police Commandos and 23 Assam Rifles. An inquiry was conducted by the District Judge, Manipur East, which found that the son was killed by the Assam Rifles in a fake encounter.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's son was killed by the Assam Rifles in a fake encounter and that there was no exchange of firing as claimed by the respondents. The court also awarded compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs to the petitioner for the human rights violation.
Issues: The main issue was to determine the circumstances of the petitioner's son's death and to establish the responsibility of the Assam Rifles in the fake encounter.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the testimonies of witnesses, lack of evidence of an encounter, and the responsibility of the Assam Rifles in the death of the petitioner's son to reach its decision. The court also invoked the principle of constitutional court remedy to award compensation for the human rights violation.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 were directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs to the petitioner within a period of 4 months. The petitioner was also given the option to claim a higher amount of compensation through appropriate civil law remedy.
N. Kotiswar Singh, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is the mother of one Thiyam Amit Meitei, who the petitioner claims to have been killed by a combined team of the Imphal East Manipur Police Commandos and 23 Assam Rifles in a fake encounter at Nongren Chinglak, Imphal East District on 29th December, 2008.
2. According to the petitioner, on 28.12.2008 her son, Thiyam Amit Meitei had left their house along with another friend namely Moirangthem Inaobi Meitei in a Yamaha Motor cycle for Tshomyang village, carrying a sum of Rs. 10,500/- for making payment to the chief of the Tshomyang Village for certain timbers purchased by his father. However, on the way to the said village when they reached Sabungkhok village they were intercepted by a team of 23 Assam Rifles and were taken to the Assam Rifles camp at Yaingangpokpi and were severely tortured and were separated. Moirangthem Inaobi Meitei, who was arrested along with the petitioner's son was subsequently handed over to the police and was brought to the official quarter of the then Deputy Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly by the police commandos where he was released.
3. The respondents have denied the allegation of fake encounter. On the other hand, it is the case of the respondents that an encounter took place between some underground cadres and combined team of commandos and 23 Assam Rifles at Nongren Chinglak at around 7 p.m. of 29.12.2008, in which one unknown person, later identified as Thiyam Amit Meitei, was found dead and one 9 mm pistol with magazine, 4 live rounds of 9 mm ammunition, one small diary, one demand letter of KCP (MC), two empty cases of AK 47 rifles ammunitions were found near the dead body and a regular case under FIR No. 159(12)08 LLI PS u/s. 307/34 IPC, 20 UA(P) A Act 2004 and 25 (1-C) Arms Act was registered at Lamlai Police Station.
4. Considering the dispute in the manner in which the petitioner's son died, this Court, vide order dated 6.7.2010 ordered for an inquiry by the District Judge, Manipur East to ascertain the facts leading to the death of the petitioner's son. Accordingly, an inquiry was conducted by the learned District Judge, Manipur East, who submitted his report before this Court on 27.07.2012, copies of which were made available to the learned counsel for the parties.
5. We have perused the report and also heard the learned counsel for the parties. As we proceed, it may be apposite to reproduce certain relevant paragraphs of the report which was in favour of the petitioner as follows.
"15. On careful examination of the testimonies of the PWs and R.Ws it is an admitted fact that the son of the petitioner, Thiyam Amit Meitei was killed by the combined Force of Manipur Police Commando and 23 Assam Rifles on 29.12.2008 at Nongren Chinglak, but, the assertions of the petitioner are that her son was arrested on 28.12.2008 by the personnel of 23 Assam Rifles and killed him in a fake encounter. On the other hand, the assertion of the respondents is that the son of the petitioner was killed in a genuine encounter between the combined force of the Manipur Police Commandos and 23 Assam Rifles and members of so called unlawful organisation, Kangleipak Communist Party (KCP) at Nongren Chinglak on 29.12.2008.
........................
.......................
On having synthetic perusal of the testimonies of the PWs it is axiomatic that the PWs are well corroborated each other and more particularly, PW No. 2 is the person who went to Tshomyang village along with the deceased, Amit Meitei on 28.12.2008 and he clearly deposed about the arrest of himself and Amit Meitei by the personnel of Assam Rifles on their way to Tshomyang village from Sabungkhok village area and releasing him later on and informing him about the killing of Amit Meitei earlier by one personnel of Assam Rifles. All the PWs were cross examined by the counsel of the respondents but their testimonies were not shaken at all except mere denial.
16...
