Are police targeting a community? Supreme Court in Assam encounters case

The Supreme Court on Monday asked the State of Assam whether the State Police had been targeting a particular community through encounter killings. [Arif Yeasin Jwadder vs State of Assam and ors]

A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan asked State counsel about the slow probe by the police into cases of fake encounters.

"Are police personnel targeting a community? Going overboard in their duties? Petitions such as this cannot be dismissed by stating as premature in nature ... The magisterial enquiry should not be going on till now. It should hardly take 10 or 15 days. These incidents are of 2021 and 2022. It would be futile," Justice Bhuyan, who hails from Assam, remarked.

The Bench said that the State has a troubled past when it comes to fake encounters.

"Whatever it maybe, it cannot be said that encounter did not happen. State has a very troubled past. There are reports as well. You cannot deny that," the Court remarked.

The Bench was hearing a plea raising concerns over fake encounter killings in Assam and seeking the registration of First Information Reports (FIRs) for the offence of murder against police personnel accused of being involved in such encounter killings.

The Assam government had earlier contended that in the last ten years, only 10 per cent of fleeing criminals have been injured in police action and this was done as a measure of self-defence.

The petitioner, advocate Arif Yeasin Jwadder, moved the Supreme Court after the Gauhati High Court declined to order an independent probe into police encounter killings in Assam.

As per his plea, over 80 police encounters have taken place in the State since May 2021.

The Gauhati High Court had come down heavily on him for allegedly filing his plea based on media reports and ‘vague, omnibus’ assertions, despite being a lawyer.

Hearing today

During the hearing today, the Supreme Court said it expected the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to do more while handling cases concerning alleged fake encounters by the Assam Police.

The Bench made it clear that the human rights body ought to be at the forefront of protecting fundamental rights.

"We expected NHRC to be at forefront on these civil liberties issue," Justice Kant remarked.

On being told that the Assam Human Rights Commission had closed a complaint in a fake encounter case because the wife of the deceased did not pursue the same, Justice Kant said,

"We clearly disapprove this practice. Why do you have to close the complaint? You pursue it."

The Bench stated that it would also examine the issue of whether the State level body instead of closing cases could have gone to court with data.

The matter was eventually adjourned to November 26 after the State of Assam was asked to give details of 171 encounter cases and the investigation done in those cases.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared for Jwadder.

Senior Additional Advocate General Nalin Kohli appeared for the State of Assam.