ARIF MD YEASIN JWADDER Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Arif Md. Yeasin Jwadder, the petitioner-in-person, who has addressed this Court from New Delhi through remote video conferencing (RVC) facility. We have also heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam, assisted by Ms. P. Baruah, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. B. Chakravarty, learned counsel representing the respondent nos. 4 and 5.

(2.) The petitioner claims to be a citizen of India and a permanent resident of the State of Assam. Espousing the cause of the victims who had been allegedly killed and / or grievously injured by the Police in "fake encounters", the instant PIL has been filed with the following prayers :-

(3.) A perusal of the averments made in the writ petition goes to show that the statements made therein are primarily based on newspaper reports down-loaded by the petitioner from different websites, which are annexed as Annexure-P/1 (colly). According to the petitioner, there were more than 80 fake encounters conducted by the Assam Police during the period from May, 2021 till the date of filing of the writ petition, resulting in the death of as many as 28 accused persons and injury being caused to more than 48. The petitioner has stated that the persons who have been killed and / or injured are not dreaded criminals but the Police department has adopted the modus operandi of carrying out fake encounters so as to eliminate the accused persons in police custody by making a false allegation that they were trying to snatch away service revolvers of the Police personnel on duty and, therefore, Police had to retaliate in exercise of Right of Self Defense. According to the petitioner, there is no proper inquiry being conducted into any of these incidents of "fake encounters' and the FIRs that have been lodged in these cases are all against the victims and not the guilty Police officials. The petitioner has also alleged that even in the Magisterial Inquiry conducted in some places into the cases of police encounters are in utter violation of the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Peoples' Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and another Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in (2014) 10 SCC 635.