Introduction

I entered the world of disappearances in Punjab, India through photographs, stories told by victims’ families, and court cases. From a lonely portrait hanging on a wall, to family pictures of an underground wedding, to evidentiary pictures of a bullet-smashed face, I held the gaze of the disappeared. I rounded out the details of the legal cases with personal stories of birthday lunches, of final family vacations, and of newborn babies meeting their fathers in jail for the first time.

Travelling through Punjabi cities and villages advanced my understanding of how disappearances have ravaged the Punjabi people. In Hajipur, Julkan, for example, I witnessed a battle for space between human and rooster, brought on by the economic deprivation of losing the only family breadwinner. Piecing together these interviews and images, I attempted to understand how the judiciary approached cases of disappearances. I met with judges and lawyers, and sifted through allegations of communalism, insensitivity, and illegality.

This Article synthesizes my research and explores the Indian judiciary’s reaction to habeas corpus petitions filed on behalf of the disappeared in the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh from 1990 to 1997, as well as the personal experiences of the victims’ families and of the lawyers and justices involved in these cases. By exploring the personal dimension and attitudes that were the human context for these cases, this Article hopes to go beyond a merely descriptive analysis of the legal issues. In addition to secondary sources, I draw from ninety habeas corpus petitions filed from 1990 to 1997, as well as interviews with fifteen families who filed petitions and with fifteen families who did not approach the judiciary. I also incorporate interviews with approximately thirty district court lawyers, High Court lawyers, Supreme Court lawyers, and retired and sitting justices of the High Court.[1]

Part I of this Article summarizes the historical and legal context of the disappearances, giving the background of human rights abuses, and the laws governing detention, disappearances, and basic habeas corpus jurisprudence in India. Part II describes why petitioners filed their cases, why they chose the High Court, and what problems they faced in filing their cases. Part III examines major judicial attitudes that framed how the judiciary approached these cases and analyzes how the High Court disposed of these cases. Part IV highlights the experiences of some of the lawyers involved. Part V explores avenues of redress in India beyond the judiciary, specifically the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and a private truth commission, banned by the High Court.