Abuse Of Power

Repression of Sikhs in Punjab is first and foremost a political resolution legitimised by Indian democratic institutions like the press, the judiciary and parliament, and carried out by its executive limbs. The following documented examples and case histories reveal to what extent the security forces in Punjab can act, in arbitrary abuse of their power, which has partially been enabled through compliance of judiciary permitting itself to be yoked to the machinery of repression.

Example I

On 21 August 1989 Mrs. Gurdev Kaur and Mrs. Gurmit Kaur, employees of Prabhat Finances and Investment Ltd., Amritsar, were working in their office located across from Khalsa College Amritsar, when a police team from the nearby town of Batala, district Gurdaspur, raided their office and forced them into a Maruti van without number plate. With the exception of Head Constable Lakhvinder Singh, all other officials were in plain clothes.

The two women were first driven to Sadar Police Station in Batala and then, at approximately 7 p.m., Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Govind Ram - known throughout Punjab for excesses committed against Sikhs, who has since been killed (January, 1990) allegedly by Sikh militants - personally supervised their torture during interrogation. Whereas Gurdev Kaur was subsequently released in the early afternoon of 22 August, Gurmit Kaur continued to be held in illegal custody till the 26th. On that day, her arrest was formally registered and a remand for her further interrogation for two days obtained by the police from a Gurdaspur court.

The police demand was then extended up to 3 September. On that date Gurmit Kaur was discharged and released from custody by the designated court. The story of their illegal detention and torture appeared in the 27 August 1989 edition of Ajit, a Punjabi daily newspaper. On 29 August, Hari Singh Nagra, advocate from the state capital Chandigarh, filed a petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court on the basis of the newspaper reports of the case, seeking medical examination of the tortured, compensation and legal proceedings against those held responsible.

The state of Punjab in its reply denied the allegations of illegal detention and torture, while admitting that Gurdev Kaur was taken to Beeko Interrogation Centre on 21 and 22 August, and that she was allowed to return home after some hours of questioning. In their reply the respondents alleged that Gurdev Kaur had confessed to her involvement in terrorist activities.

On 11 September 1989 both Gurmit Kaur and Gurdev Kaur filed applications before the High Court asking that they be medically examined for ascertainment of their torture. The petition (No. 2861 of 1989) was however, dismissed by Justice S.S. Diwan on the following grounds of untenability:

1. The two women in their applications claimed to have been tortured by the SSP of Batala personally, whereas the petition filed by Hari Singh Nagra only alleged that they have been tortured at his instance. (The petition was filed by a public-spirited lawyer who had read about their illegal custody and torture in a newspaper. Minor contradictions between his petition and the applications filed by the victims could not, therefore, be seen to vitiate the case).

2. The two women did not complain about their having been tortured to the Magistrate before whom they appeared on 26 August. Gurmit Kaur only asked him for a medical examination on 30 August and upon being taken to the Civil Hospital stated in writing to the police that she did not wish to be examined. (According to the police, Gurdev Kaur was never arrested and produced before a Magistrate. Gurmit Kaur did apply for medical examination on 30 August but the statement she gave at Civil Hospital alleging she had refused examination, was made under duress. Since she remained in police custody for five more days, her subsequent request to the High Court for examination had, independent of all these facts, a sound basis).

3. While applying to the High Court for examination at a belated stage they did not support the allegation of torture in custody with a medical certificate. (If the request was delayed, this was because they were bed- ridden following their release from police custody. On learning that a petition had been filed on their behalf by a public-spirited lawyer, they took heart and decided to file their own affidavits.

The fact that no hospital would give them a medical certificate establishing their torture in custody was precisely the reason prompting them to seek the High Court's intervention.

Example II

The respective families of the Sikh priest (granthi) Joginder Singh and Makhan Singh, a small grocer, who both resided in Bham Village, Batala sub-division, had before 11 June 1989, little in common except that both had had teenaged daughters who were friends.

Joginder Singh's 14-year old daughter Salwinder Kaur was attending the local school, whereas Sarabjit Kaur, Makhan Singh's daughter of the same age had left school after completing her fifth standard. Joginder Singh had left the house early Sunday morning on June 11 1989, for a neighbouring village to perform a religious ceremony. Makhan Singh had also gone to Hargovindpur, a nearby town, to shop. Around 9 a.m., Darshan Kaur, Salwinder's mother, requested her to go and fetch some soft clay from the canal bank located one and a half kilometres from their home, to redaub the mud flooring of the house, a regular chore. Salwinder picked up her friend Sarabjit and with her on the pillion of her bicycle, pedalled to the canal bank. They returned after 20 minutes with a pack of clay and went back again to fetch some more.

Pratap Singh, Joginder Singh's younger brother, was by then in his fields mowing grass for fodder when he noticed the girls cycling towards the canal for the second time. He also saw a police jeep parked by the side of untarred road leading to the canal and that some constables, amongst them Purushottam Singh, of a nearby police post, were standing at the road side talking to Palwinder Singh, alias Pilla, son of Joginder Singh of the same village, who had a reputation of being a drunkard and a loafer. Pratap Singh then saw Purushottam and Palwinder Singh leap on to the bicycle when it approached and pull Sarabjit down from the pillion. A visibly frightened Salwinder tried to pedal on but fell when she crashed against a tree. Pratap Singh then saw the policemen grab both girls, push them into the jeep and drive away with them. Although he raised an alarm, there was no one in the vicinity since most villagers had gathered to watch the popular Sunday morning showing of the Ramayana on television.

Pratap Singh then rushed to Joginder Singh's house and informed Darshan Kaur, his sister-in- law and Salwinder's mother, about the kidnapping. When Joginder Singh and Makhan Singh returned home, they proceeded together with Pratap Singh and Rajinder Singh, a fellow villager, to the spot where the girls had been seized and managed to recover the girl's slippers and bicycle. They devoted the entire day to searching for the girls, but in vain. The following morning they went to the police station in Hargovindpur, accompanied by several villagers, including Kundan Singh, the head of the village council of elders, to lodge a First Information Report regarding the abduction. The Assistant Sub-Inspector on duty, Harjinder Singh Bahal, refused to register their complaint but promised to search for the girls. Rajinder Singh, who had also gone to the station, told the officer that both Purushottam and Palwinder Singh were friends and on several instances had been seen misbehaving with the village girls. But the officer on duty still refused to take down their complaint formally.

Joginder Singh and Makhan Singh revisited the police station several times in following days to inquire about their daughters, only to be told that the search was continuing. In the night of 16 June policemen from Hargovindpur came to the homes of Joginder Singh and Makhan to request them to accompany them to the station to identify their daughters whose dead bodies they claimed to have recovered floating in the canal. Accompanied by several other villagers, they proceeded to the station in Hargovindpur. Two naked distended bodies were lying in a police van parked outside the station. The policemen forced them to get into a bus and drove them to the Civil Hospital in Batala town where they met Harjinder Singh, the same Sub-inspector who had previously refused to register the fathers' complaints, who was now leading the policemen. He told Joginder and Makhan Singh to inform the hospital authorities that the bodies were unidentified and unclaimed and had been recovered by the police in their presence from the canal near Hargovindpur.

When both refused to disclaim their daughter's identities, Harjinder Singh threatened that they would be eliminated in a 'faked encounter' if they disobeyed. (A faked encounter or encounter killing enabled police to kill with impunity, by pretending they had been ambushed by alleged terrorists and only killed them in self-defence).

Joginder Singh managed to slip away and proceeded to the residence of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Batala. The Assistant Sub-inspector took Makhan Singh back to Hargovindpur police station where Purshottam, the constable accused of abducting the girls, together with another Sub-inspector Ram Lubhaya Bagga, waited. The three of them proceeded to mishandle Makhan Singh, which continued until the morning of the 17th. In the meantime, Joginder Singh had managed to talk to the Magistrate indicated who ordered that after the postmortem the girl's bodies be handed over to their parents for cremation.

The report of the postmortem (marked AN PMQ 66/89) performed early in the morning of 18 June 1989, recorded that the cause of death could be ascertained only after a chemical examination of a vaginal swab. In a report of the incident appearing in The Tribune of 8 July 1989, the SSP of Batala, the said Govind Ram, was quoted to have laughingly remarked that the interrogation of Purushottam had revealed that he had been having an affair with one of the girls.

On 9 July 1989 the police station at Batala registered a criminal case No.85/1 under sections 363 - kidnapping, 376 - rape, and 302 - murder, of the Indian Penal Code, against Purushottam Singh, Constable. Although he was arrested and committed to judicial custody, he was released on bail when the prosecution failed to file a charge-sheet against him within the stipulated period of three months.

On 12 December 1989, Makhan Singh and Joginder Singh moved the court of judicial Magistrate, first class, Batala, with the request that the court may direct the authorities to produce reports of chemical examinations ordered by the Batala Civil Hospital. Although the Magistrate ordered the copies of the reports to be given to the parents, they have not yet received them.

Meanwhile, Purushottam has been set free on bail and it is rumoured that he has even been elevated to a posting at Sadar Police station in Batala.

Example III

On 18 April 1989 Baldev Singh son of Jagir Singh, resident of village Shahpur (police station Beas), district Amritsar, was picked up by a team of policemen led by inspector Mohinder Singh, station house officer at Mehta Chowk police station in the same district.

Baldev Singh's brother, Malkiat Singh, discovered in early June 1989, that inspector Mohinder Singh had been detaining his brother for interrogation in a private house belonging to the head of the village council near Mehta Chowk. He filed a petition (No.1777/89) on 4 June 1989 regarding this fact and pleaded for a writ of habeas corpus for the production of his brother. Justice N.C. Jain who heard the petition appointed a warrant officer and when on 6 June the latter reached the said house, he found it locked from the outside. He then went on to the police station at Mehta Chowk situated only 100 yards from the house and informed the Assistant Sub-inspector Rajinder Singh and the head constable Charanjit Singh about the matter and about the High Court order to search for Baldev Singh. When the police officers refused to cooperate the warrant officer went back to the locked house and requested Malkiat Singh to climb up to the roof and call out loudly for Baldev Singh. A voice was heard responding from inside the house. Breaking open the lock, they entered and inside, came to a room similarly locked from the outside.

When they broke open this lock too, they found Baldev Singh lying on the floor; he was unable to get up and had to be lifted by Malkiat Singh, his brother, and Kuldeep Singh, his brother-in-law. The warrant officer then returned with them to the police station Mehta Chowk and was told by inspector Mohinder Singh that Baldev Singh was not wanted in connection with any case and that he had never been in his custody. Malkiat Singh and Kuldeep Singh hired a Maruti van and took Baldev Singh to Chandigarh for admission into a hospital, but all refused him admission without court orders.

They then approached Amar Singh Chahal, a lawyer, who told them that 7 June was a court holiday and that the High Court could be moved only the following day. He further advised that Baldev Singh should be kept in safety until the court issued instructions for his hospitalisation. They then shifted him to a relative's house No. 136, Phase II of Mohalli, a suburb of Chandigarh. His brother Malkiat remained with him. Kuldeep Singh left for his village in the Maruti van which had been hired to bring Baldev to Chandigarh, but on the way, he was intercepted by inspector Mohinder Singh on the Grand Trunk Road and compelled to reveal the whereabouts of his brother-in-law Baldev.

After obtaining this information, the inspector instructed one of the head constables in his team to take him into custody and he himself proceeded to the house No. 136 in the Maruti van and took both Baldev and Malkiat Singh into custody. He forced them into the van and drove away with them. Near Kharar in Ropar district, Mohinder Singh asked Malkiat to get out of the van and drove away with Baldev Singh. In an affidavit dated 8 June 1989 filed before the High Court, Malkiat Singh stated all these details. Baldev Singh's whereabouts remained unknown for the following two months.

On 9 August Jagir Singh, Baldev's father, filed a petition (No. 2624/89) in the High Court stating that Baldev was in the custody of the Central Reserve Police force (CRPF) unit stationed at a Public Works Department's rest house in Ramdas, district Amritsar.

In response the High Court once again appointed a warrant office, Gian Singh, to search for the detainee at the rest house mentioned in the petition. When he arrived there on 10 August, the warrant officer found the detainee, but the CRPF officials still denied knowledge about the circumstances and reasons for his detention and told him to enquire from the police station Ramdas located near the rest house. Warrant Officer Gian Singh proceeded to the station where was was asked to contact officers of the station at Mehta Chowk for information on the case. When he arrived there he discovered that no case had been filed against Baldev Singh and he left after telling inspector Mohinder Singh that the High Court had ordered Baldev's production in the court on 11 August 1989. At his hearing which was postponed till the 25th, the High Court finally ordered his release.

Baldev Singh's brother-in-law Kuldeep Singh who had been intercepted by the inspector on 6th June on his way from Chandigarh to Shahpur, has been untraced since that date.

When, after two months, Malkiat Singh discovered where Kuldeep Singh was being detained, he filed a second petition (No.2623/89) and the High Court once again appointed a warrant officer, R.L. Bhatia, who reached the Canal Rest House near Bheowal, the suspected place of detention, on 10 August and found Kuldeep Singh handcuffed and in a very weak state inside one of the rooms. Kuldeep told the officer that he had been held there for the last two months. Assistant sub-inspector Jasvinder Singh, who was present in the rest house, informed him that there was no case registered against Kuldeep Singh.

He then proceeded to police station Mehta Chowk where he was told that a case of apprehension of breach of peace was registered against Kuldeep at 1 p.m. on the same day under section 107/151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Daily Diary No.8). It was the last entry made in the diary before the arrival of the warrant officer. Although surely, the misdemeanour of the police officers was indubitably established in this case through a judicial process calling for their exemplary punishment, no action has so far been initiated against them either departmentally or judicially.

Example IV

Nineteen year old Ranjit Singh was studying commerce in Khalsa college of Amritsar. He lived with his mother Bachan Kaur and a sister, Kanwaljit, Kaur, in house No.63 of Seva Nagar, Amritsar. His father Bua Singh had died some years ago. His elder brother Charanjit Singh lived in Dhanbad, the well known coal town in Bihar State, where he worked for a transport firm.

On the morning of 10 February 1988 Gurdev Singh, an Inspector, and his assistant, Mohinder Singh, from Sadar police station in Amritsar, came to pick up Ranjit Singh at his house. "We have to question your son on some minor problems. Don't worry, he will come back", they told Ranjit Singh's anxious mother.

The same evening Mohinder Singh came back to the house and demanded from Bachan Kaur a sum of Rs. 20,000 for her son's release. Her elder son was far away. She had no money to pay the ransom demanded from her. She sent a telegram to Charanjit Singh to immediately come to Amritsar. In the meanwhile Mohinder Singh kept up his visits to Bachan Kaur's house to repeat his demand of ransom for Ranjit Singh's release. She told him that her elder son was on his way to Amritsar and after his arrival would try to raise the money to procure his brother's release.

Charanjit Singh came to Amritsar on 19 February. He went to Sadar Police Station and talked to Gurdev Singh and Mohinder Singh. He requested them to either release his brother or to produce him in a court on whatever charge they had against him. The police officials asked him to pay Rs. 20,000. He told them that he could not raise the money on such a short notice. For some days he kept up his attempts to persuade the officers to release his brother. He failed.

On 21 February Ranjit Singh was moved out of Sadar police station. Mohinder Singh told Charanjit Singh on that day that his brother would be killed if he did not pay. Charanjit asked them to give him ten days more to raise the money. On 9 March 1988 Charanjit Singh filed a habeas corpus writ petition No.452/88 in the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh. The petition was heard by Justice Ujagar Singh the same day. I quote from the petition:

"Ranjit Singh was arrested by the respondents from his house on 2 February 1988 at 6 a.m. From that time up till now the detainee has not been produced in any court. No case has been registered against him and his detention is totally illegal... The respondents have been approached to secure release of the detainee... they are demanding Rs. 20,000 for the detainee's release... It is therefore prayed that (a) a writ in the nature of habeas corpus be issued... (b) a warrant officer of this court be appointed to conduct a search... to recover the detainee from the illegal custody..."

The Judge appointed an officer of the court, Jai Singh Patial, to carry out the search as prayed for by the petitioner. Jai Singh Patial left Chandigarh for Amritsar in the evening of 9 March accompanied by Charanjit Singh. Charanjit Singh went out to find out where his brother was being detained on the 10th morning. He bribed a clerk, Tirath Singh, in Sadar police station, who let him know that Ranjit Singh was in the police post of Sultanwind, a locality in Amritsar. In the evening at 3.15 p.m. Charanjit led the officer of the court to the police post. The detainee, Ranjit Singh, was found in the lock up. I quote from the search report which Jai Singh Patial submitted to the High Court:

"I asked the wireless operator, who did not disclose his name, to give the roznamcha (a daily diary maintained at every police post). He took away the roznamcha and did not hand over the same to me... I threatened him that if he did not hand over the same to me then I would bring this fact to the notice of the Hon'ble Judge. Thereafter he put the roznamcha on the table. I made the necessary entries... I tried to come out of the Sultanwind police post but the operator and Shri Ajit Singh, constable No.1057, did not allow me to come out of the police post and asked me to stay there till the arrival of Gurmeet Chand, the officer incharge of the post. I stayed there. The operator told me that the alleged detainee had been brought from the Vijay Nagar police post the day before (March 9, 1988) and that it was their bad luck that the police post has been raided today. Gurmeet Singh came there after half an hour. On my asking, he informed me that the alleged detainee had been arrested by Shri Mohinder Singh, ASI, police station Sadar, in some robbery case and he had been sent here to the Sultanwind police post at about 4.30 p.m. on March 10, 1988 for interrogation. He further told me that no entry regarding the arrival of the detainee has so far been made in the roznamcha..."

No comments are required to explain the significance of the conflicting statements made by the wireless operator and the sub-inspector regarding the date and the time when Ranjit Singh was brought to Sultanwind police post. They give away the lies.

In spite of the outcome of the search the police denied that Ranjit Singh had ever been in their illegal custody. No action has been taken against the officials who abducted Ranjit Singh, kept him in illegal detention for over a month, demanded ransom from his mother for his release and conspired and threatened to kill him extra-judicially.