Soldier gets life in Machil fake encounter case

[Hindustani78]

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/petition-has-tacit-army-support/article24692955.ece
New Delhi, August 14, 2018 22:33 IST
Updated: August 14, 2018 22:35 IST

Officers have moved Supreme Court seeking immunity from action in insurgency-hit areas

The Defence Ministry seemed unperturbed at the manner in which over 300 Army officers approached the Supreme Court seeking protection from prosecution in insurgency-hit areas.

Official sources said the officers had done so in an “individual capacity”.

Advocate Aishwarya Bhati, who is representing them, said the move was undertaken individually by the officers and they had not contacted the Defence Ministry. However, there seems to be tacit support of the Army for the move.

“On August 20, we have admission hearing. We will also be praying for interim stay so that no investigation or adjudication is carried on in violation of the protection under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) without the sanction of the Central government,” Ms. Bhati told The Hindu.

Stating that the Army’s own criminal adjudication system is very robust, Ms. Bhati said the petition was not for protection of fundamental rights of the officers. “This protection is to facilitate their operations and engagements with the enemy in insurgency, proxy war and militancy areas and to dilute it would imperil the nation’s sovereignty and integrity,” she added.

AFSPA footprint

The petition comes as the Home Ministry pushes to reduce the footprint of the AFSPA in the Northeast. The law gives immunity to security forces operating in insurgency-hit areas. “They have gone to court in their personal capacity. Article 21 and 32 of the Constitution allows servicemen to go to court,” an official source said. When contacted, Army officials refused to comment.

In 2016-end, when videos surfaced on social media of jawans complaining about ill-treatment under the sahayak or orderly system, the Army had initiated action against them for bypassing the established channels of grievance redress. Following the videos, Gen. Rawat warned personnel against using social media and put out a WhatsApp number for soldiers to convey their problems directly.

 

[Hindustani78]

SC to hear plea of Army men challenging prosecution in AFSPA areas

New Delhi, August 20, 2018 14:39 IST
Updated: August 20, 2018 14:39 IST

https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...rosecution-in-afspa-areas/article24736159.ece

The Court on Monday said that it will hear on September 4, a plea by over 300 Army personnel challenging registration of FIRs against them for operations in Manipur and Jammu and Kashmir where the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) is in force.

The petition came up for hearing before a Bench comprising Justices Madan B. Lokur, S. Abdul Nazeer and Deepak Gupta and the court said the matter has to be heard by the Bench which had passed an order in this regard in 2017.

“It has to go before the same Bench,” Justice Lokur said.

Justice Lokur said that he, along with Justice U.U. Lalit, had passed the order in 2017 and the matter has to go before the same Bench.

The court on July 14, 2017, constituted the Special Investigation Team (SIT) and ordered lodging of FIRs and probe into as many as 1,528 cases of alleged extra-judicial killings in Manipur.

Meanwhile, the Bench said that two separate petitions related to Manipur fake encounter cases will be heard on September 4.

The main petition said Army personnel were being “persecuted” and proceeded against for performing duties in such disturbed areas.

The filing of the plea by serving Army officers assumed significance as the CBI’s SIT has recently filed charge sheets in two separate encounter cases in Manipur against armed forces in which murder charges have been slapped.

The SIT was constituted by the apex court while hearing a matter related to alleged fake encounters by the Army, the Assam Rifles and the State police in Manipur.

 

[Hindustani78]

https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...ounter-cases-cbi-tells-sc/article24737647.ece

This petition, by senior officers at the level of Commanders, came shortly after the Supreme Court had directed a CBI-SIT team to file chargesheets, in a time-bound manner, against Army officers involved in the Manipur encounters.
A Special Bench monitoring the CBI probe into the alleged extra-judicial killings in Manipur will hear a petition filed by 355 Army officers alleging “persecution” by agencies like the CBI for doing their duty in the insurgency-hit areas of Jammu and Kashmir and north-eastern States.

The petition came up for hearing before a three-judge Bench of Justices Madan B. Lokur, S. Abdul Nazeer and Deepak Gupta on Monday. However, Justice Lokur told senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi and Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for Colonel Amit Kumar and other Army officers, that the petition should be heard by a Bench comprising himself and Justice U.U. Lalit.

It was this Bench of Justices Lokur and Lalit, in a July 2016 judgment, had ripped open the cloak of immunity provided by the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act of 1958 (AFSPA). The judgment had declared that “there is no concept of absolute immunity from trial by a criminal court” if an Army man has committed an offence.

The Bench, which is hearing a PIL seeking a probe into as many as 1,528 cases of extra-judicial killings in Manipur, had on July 14 last year constituted an SIT and ordered lodging of chargesheets.

Justice Lokur posted the Army officers’ petition for hearing on September 4, orally remarking that they (Justices Lokur and Lalit) need time to study the petition. The Manipur case was later scheduled along with the Army officers’ petition.

This petition, by senior officers at the level of Commanders, came shortly after the Supreme Court had directed a CBI-SIT team to file chargesheets, in a time-bound manner, against Army officers involved in the Manipur encounters.

The officers said an “extraordinary circumstance” was prevailing over armed forces personnel fighting in the insurgency-hit areas and the nation’s borders. They are plagued by doubts whether performing their duty to fight enemies would expose them to prosecution and land them in jail.

The petition said the Supreme Court’s orders and the resultant CBI action against Army personnel have made soldiers jittery. The petitioners said officers like them were finding it difficult to answer their men’s questions. “The ongoing situation is demoralising the officers and troops deployed in field areas and fighting in counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency operations in Jammu and Kashmir and north-eastern States.”

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Wish if yr Supreme Court does that also for people in IOK!

 

[ayesha.a]

Wish if yr Supreme Court does that also for people in IOK!

Where do you think this happened?

Note that it wasn't even the Supreme Court, but the Indian army itself that court-martialed and sentenced them.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Where do you think this happened?

Note that it wasn't even the Supreme Court, but the Indian army itself that court-martialed and sentenced them.

manipur

 

[Hindustani78]

https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...nhappy-note/article24794304.ece?homepage=true

The last two months of his term witnessed increased friction between his office and the Centre and the Army over a range of issues, ruling out his much-expected extension till December.

Raj Bhavan officials told The Hindu that the differences were triggered by the killing of three civilians, one a teenage girl, in firing by the Army during an area-domination patrol in Kulgam on July 7.

The following day, a piqued Mr. Vohra sought the presence of Lt. Gen. Ranbir Singh, General Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Northern Command of the Army, at a meeting in Srinagar over the killings.

The two, sources said, were not on the same page on how to deal with the growing militancy and street protests in south Kashmir.

Mr. Vohra had directed the Army to “avoid that could lead to possible civilian casualties”, fuelling tension between the Raj Bhavan and the Army.

The relationship soured further on July 12 when the dispensation under Mr. Vohra decided to lodge an FIR under Section 307 (attempt to murder) against the Army over the killing of a civilian, Khalid Gaffar Malik, 22, a shopkeeper, in Kupwara. Malik was hit by a bullet in the throat when the Army fired “in defence against stone throwing”. Sources said the Army, though unhappy with the move, for a while decided against operations in civilian areas in south Kashmir, which indeed helped in halting civilian deaths.

Mr. Vohra also saw himself on the opposite side of the Centre’s Kashmir approach. In the last week of July, Mr. Vohra put his foot down on Article 35A, which defines State subject laws.

 

[Hindustani78]

NEW DELHI, August 29, 2018 01:28 IST
Updated: August 29, 2018 01:28 IST

https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...-encounters/article24804873.ece?homepage=true

The Central Bureau of Investigation has registered 31st FIR related to the Manipur “fake” encounters, pursuant to the Supreme Court directive.

The fresh FIR has been registered in connection with the death of Elangbam Kiranjit Singh on April 24, 2009. Justice Santosh Hedge Commission had submitted a report on March 30, 2013, had given its opinion on the death.

“Justice Santosh Hegde Commission opined in their report…that even if the case put forward by the complainant (father of the deceased) cannot be accepted, case put forth by the security forces cannot also be accepted because they exceeded their right of private defence. Therefore, the Commission was of the opinion that the incident in question cannot be justified on the ground of self-defence,” said the FIR.

Accordingly, the CBI has registered the FIR under relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The agency has so far filed three charge sheets in the Manipur "fake" encounter cases.

 

[ayesha.a]

manipur

Is Machil in Manipur? That's news to me.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Is Machil in Manipur? That's news to me.

its in the water!

 

[ayesha.a]

its in the water!

I have no idea what you are saying.

But on topic, any Indian military professional who fakes encounters should be and will be punished. That is why the armed forces are the most trusted bunch in the country.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

I have no idea what you are saying.

But on topic, any Indian military professional who fakes encounters should be and will be punished. That is why the armed forces are the most trusted bunch in the country.

replace L with I and I with L in machil

 

[Hindustani78]

Ajay Banerjee
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, September 2

In a significant move, Army Chief General Bipin Rawat has expressed his “disagreement” over a spate in court cases filed by serving officers, even as he warned that moral turpitude will not go unpunished. He has also halted activities of the Army Wives Welfare Association (AWWA) in field areas.

Faced with a “running commentary” on the social media over his decisions, General Rawat addressed Colonel-level officers posted in New Delhi at Manekshaw Centre here on Saturday.

He questioned the need for serving officers to file individual cases challenging ongoing criminal cases faced by fellow officers serving in insurgency-hit areas.

An officer, speaking to The Tribune, quoted the Army Chief as saying: “The Army was fighting these cases, now if these guys (the petitioners in court) lose the case, what will happen?”

 

[Hindustani78]

https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...s-a-warning-to-army-ranks/article24866206.ece

Says will crack down on immoral acts

Cases of moral turpitude and corruption,the Indian Army will be dealt with sternly, the Chief of the Army Staff, General Bipin Rawat, said on Tuesday while responding to questions.

“I had clearly said that any case of moral turpitude and corruption will be dealt with in a very stern manner. The Court of Inquiry has recommended that we should go in for court-martial proceedings,” Gen. Rawat said in response to questions from the media on the sidelines of a seminar on social media organised by the Centre for Joint Warfare Studies.

If the issue is related to “moral turpitude”, action will be taken accordingly, Gen. Rawat said. “If it is something else, the punishment will be (according) to the crime he has committed.”

Stating that use of smartphones by soldiers cannot be prevented, Gen. Rawat said instead they should be taught how to use them properly. Further, he observed that social media could be leveraged for psychological warfare and deception not just in conventional warfare but also in combating proxy war, insurgency and terrorism.

“For doing this, we need to have an organisation in place at all levels. It is in the backdrop of this, we have undertaken a study in the Army headquarters for restructuring the headquarters within. How do we then ensure that the social media platform becomes an important adjunct of our information warfare strategy. Do we need a Directorate General of Information Warfare,” Gen. Rawat asked.

He cautioned that armed forces need to keep pace with social media.

 

[Hindustani78]

Legal Correspondent
New Delhi, September 28, 2018 15:41 IST
Updated: September 29, 2018 01:07 IST
SC’s remarks have ‘shaken’ morale of security forces: A-G
Some Army officers, supported fully by the Centre, on Friday urged a Supreme Court Bench of Justices to recuse itself from monitoring the CBI probe into alleged fake encounters in Manipur.

They said certain oral remarks made by the Bench at an earlier hearing questioning the non-arrest of accused persons had spooked Army personnel operating in Manipur.

Appearing for the officers, senior advocate said there was a “genuine apprehension in the minds of the soldiers.” Their morale was affected by the reported comments of the court. They were afraid the comments would affect their trial later.

But amicus curiae and senior advocate appearing for some of the victim groups, assured the Bench that the plea was merely an attempt to “overawe” the court.

The Bench reserved the pleas made by the officers for orders. The decision is likely to come on October 1.

The controversy is about a July 30 hearing in which the court had questioned the CBI for filing two chargesheets against 14 persons, charging them of murder of innocent civilians, criminal conspiracy and tampering of evidence in the Manipur encounter deaths, without bothering to arrest them. The lawyers from both sides read out The Hindu report quoting Justice comment to CBI Director during the July 30 hearing.

Justice , it is quoted in the news report, had said “So there are 14 persons, who according to you are murderers, roaming around in Manipur on the streets of Imphal?” senior advocate submitted that the oral comments have created a “perception of bias”.

“Whether the Bench should now continue or insist on monitoring the CBI investigation?” senior advocate submitted.