Landu Deogam and Others Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary - Court Judgment

1. The present public interest litigation has been filed by the three petitioners claiming themselves to be the Members of Scheduled Tribes of the State of Jharkhand. Petitioner No. 1 and 2 were said to have been present at the place of the incidence which occurred on 29/30^thJune 2011 in which one Mangal Honhaga was killed during anti naxal operation conducted by the CRPF in Saranda forest area,West Singhbhum. Petitioner no. 3 claims to be the brother of the deceased Mangal Honhaga.

2. Petitioners have alleged that during anti naxal operations being conducted by the State Police / CRPF in June 2011, the petitioner no. 1 and one another person were forcibly taken to the Jungle by the Police / CRPF personnel on 28^thJune 2011. It is alleged on behalf of the petitioners that on the fateful night on 28^thJune 2011 at 1.00 AM, while the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 and other villagers proceeded towards Chotanagra, the Police Force was marching with around 15 tribals / village persons who were with them and were forced to carry the luggage, provision, ammunition, explosives, etc. of the Police/CRPF. Thereafter, petitioners heard the sound of shouts apparently in the voice of the deceased Mangal Honhaga that he is unable to carry the luggage any further. Thereafter, they alleged to have heard further shouts about firing of guns and in the light flashed by the Police / CRPF, the petitioner no. 1 saw Mangal Honhaga lying on the ground writhing in pain. It is alleged on behalf of the petitioner no. 1 that there was some conversation amongst the Police/CRPF as to why firing was done and these petitioners were directed to move ahead and they were asked not to tell about the incident to anyone. It is alleged by these petitioners that the said Mangal Honhaga died as a result of such gunshot injury. Thereafter, FIR being Chotanagar P.S. Case No. 06/11 was registered at the behest of Shambhu Kumar Biswas who was the Assistant Commandant of CRPF.

3. It is alleged that the deceased Mangal Honhaga died as a result of gunshot injury fired by the same Shambhu Kumar Biswas, the case was being made that he had died in encounter between Police/CRPF and Maoist. It is alleged by the petitioners that the FIR was registered by Shambhu Kumar Biswas, Assistant Commandant, CRPF who in fact shot the said person and tried to make out a case of encounter between the Police/CRPF and Maoist and that the deceased was alleged to have been killed as a result of firing by Maoist.

4. In the wake of such allegations, petitioners chose to prefer the instant public interest litigation inter-alia seeking direction for investigation by the CBI in the matter. They have also prayed for a direction to pay compensation to the family members / relative of the deceased who was killed, as also to inquire into Human Rights Violations made by the Security Forces during their operation in Saranda Forest of West Singhbhum and other predominantly populated tribal areas of the State of Jharkand.

5. In the wake of such allegation and the prayer made in the instant public interest litigation, the concerned respondents were asked to offer their response on the earlier dates. From the affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent State of Jharkhand, it appears that the incident was also inquired into by the CID wing of the Jharkhand Police by an officer of the rank of Dy. Superintendent of Police, CID. It further appears that the National Human Rights Commission had also directed the State Government to inquire into the matter. The affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent State of Jharkhand on 20^thSeptember 2012 discloses that initially, one Chotanagara P.S. Case No. 06/11 was registered on 30^thJune 2011 under sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 17 of the CLA Act, section 17 of the UAP Act and section 27 of the Arms Act with regard to the death of Mangal Honhaga in police encounter. Subsequently, on the direction of the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, the Sub Divisional Officer, Porahat, Chakradharpur also submitted a inquiry report on 25^thSeptember 2011 which was sent to the National Human Rights Commission and also to the Additional Director General of Police, (CID), Jharkhand. It further appears from perusal of the said affidavit that after the investigation done by the CID, the Deputy Inspector General, CID in his letter dated 3^rdSeptember 2012 found complicity of police officials of the Armed Forces in the aforesaid incidence of death of Mangal Honhaga during anti naxal operation carried out on 28^th/ 29^thJune 2011. Consequently, it appears that a police case being Chhotanagra P.S. (West Singhbhum) Case No. 09/12 was registered on 7^thSeptember 2012 under sections 342, 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

6. The respondent State have submitted a status report in the instant writ petition in respect of the investigation being carried out by the CID and the subsequent FIR referred to herein-above. In the said status report, it has been stated that during the investigation and supervision, the criminal case instituted by Shambhu Kumar Biswas, Assistant Commandant, CRPF 192 BN was found to be false. It has been further stated that during the investigation of the case, and after inquiry from villagers who have narrated the incident, it was found that the act was committed by the officials and personnel of the CRPF. Magistrate inquiry has also been done which reported that no actual encounter had taken place, rather the deceased was killed by firing of CRPF. On the basis of such investigation, supervision done by the Regional CID, Dy. Superintendent of Police, Jamshedpur, Medical Postmortem report of Board of Doctors, Statements of independent witnesses, circumstances, previous case history and registration of false case by Assistant Commandant, CRPF, it has been observed in the status report that it was a case of murder done by the Assistant Commandant, CRPF Shambhu Kumar Biswas by his own arms. In the aforesaid background, a formal FIR being Chhotanagra P.S. (West Singhbhum) Case No. 09/12 has been registered against some officials of the CRPF.

7. However, CRPF has filed a detailed counter affidavit stating that the deceased Mangal Honhoga died due to bullet injury fired by naxal upon Police / CRPF party when police forces were in LUP at night in Bahada jungle. In their counter affidavit filed on behalf of CRPF, they have further stated that Mangal Honhoga was killed in cross firing between police forces and Maoist and since the dead body was found near the firing position of Naxal, according to CRPF, Mangal Honhoga died only due to bullet hit from the side of the Naxal.

8. However, in the aforesaid background of the case, since criminal case has been registered on the basis of the investigation done by the CID Wing of the Jharkhand Police, it is for the accused officer to put forth his defence before the competent court.

9. From the supplementary counter affidavit filed by the State, it further appears that a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- has been paid to Smt. Mangri Honhoga, wife of the deceased Mangal Honhoga by the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum as compensation. The widow of the deceased Mangal Honhoga has also been provided appointment on Class-IV post in Chakradharpur Block by the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa.

10. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners, State as well as Union of India, it appears that the State authorities have inquired into the matter through their own Crime Investigation Department and also lodged criminal case on the basis of their own investigation against certain officials of CRPF. It further appears that compensation has already been provided to the widow of the deceased Mangal Honhoga. It also appears that the widow of the deceased-Mangal Honhoga has also been granted compassionate appointment. In these circumstances, it appears that the grievance of the petitioners raised in the instant public interest litigation has more or less been redressed. An FIR has been registered against the officials of the CRPF after an inquiry conducted by the CID Wing of the police department, Government of Jharkhand and the matter is being investigated. At this stage, we are not convinced that any inquiry, as sought for, by the CBI is required to be directed by this Court.

11. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant public interest litigation is disposed of.