ZUKHELI SEMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Habeas Corpus petition relates to the missing of one Shri Viyikhu Sema, aged about 70 years from the custody of the 4th respondent, Commanding Officer 5/3 Gorkha Rifles, Rangapahar Army Cantonment, Dimapur Nagaland, C/o. 99, A.P.O. on 11-4-1994. It is alleged that on 11-4-1994, the Contingent of 5/3 Gorkha Rifles under the leadership of one Major Kartar Singh Sirohi conducted search in and around the house of Viyikhu Sema at about 7 a.m. and he has been placed under arrest at gun point and taken away to the Army Cantonment at Rangapahar, and since than the husband of the petitioner was not traceable. This petition was espoused by his wife. Petitioner also reported the matter to the Officer-in-charge of Police Station (West) Dimapur on 16th April, 1994, without any result.

(2.) An application dated 22-4-1994 addressed to the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur by the Head Gaonbura of Zitovi village stating that Viyikhu Sema has been arrested by the Jawans of the 4th respondent led by one Major after searching his house thoroughly on 11-4-1994 at about 7 a.m., and since then, he could not be traced despite of vigorous search. Hence the present petition praying inter alia to produce the detenu before this Court.

(3.) After showing cause, respondent No. 4 filed two counters. One counter was filed on 6-6-1994 and the respondent No. 4 in paragraph 6 of the counter denied that person named Shri Viyikhu was arrested by 5/3 Gorkha Rifles nor the said individual is in the custody of 5/3 Gorkha Rifles. Subsequently, another counter was filed on 15-6-1994 and it is stated in paragraph 4 of the counter that the detenu Shri Viyikhu Sema accompanied the patrol party to Rangapahar. The respondent however, denied that the detenu has been arrested at gunpoint nor was he directed to accompany patrol party to the post at Rangapahar. It is further averred in paragraph 4 of the counter that, during the casual search of the detenu's house, some incriminating documents were recovered from the house of the detenu, but in view of his old age, he was requested to come to the post the next day, i.e. on 12-4-1994, however, as requested by the detenu, he was allowed to accompany the petrol party to the post that day itself i.e. 11-4-1994, and after reaching the post, the patrol leader did not ask him any question, instead with due respect offered him lunch and after lunch the old man proceeded for his work to town on the same day i.e. 11-4-1994.