From: Kirity Roy <kirityroy@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 1:08 PM
Subject: Request for recalling the order passed in Case no. 1082/25/13/2010-PF
To: NHRC <covdnhrc@nic.in>
Cc: jrlawnhrc <jrlawnhrc@nic.in>
12th December 2011
To
The Chairman
National Human Rights Commission
Faridkot House
Copernicus Marg
New Delhi-110001
Respected Sir,
We received your letter dated 12.9.2011 in connection with Case no. 1082/25/13/2010-PF.
We found from your letter that the Commission has decided to close the case on the basis of the reports submitted by the police and the BSF.
In your letter it is stated that the Commission vide its proceeding dated 3.6.2011 directed a copy of the report of SP, Murshidabad, West Bengal be sent to the complainant as well as the victim for comments. Again we found from your letter that neither the complainant nor the victim has responded to the Commission's letter dated 15.6.2011.
We hereby firmly mention that we being the complainant in this case till date did not receive any copy of the report of SP, Murshidabad, West Bengal as well as the Commission's letter dated 15.6.2011. Therefore we did not get any opportunity to place our comments on the reports submitted to the Commission. We would be happy if the Commission sends us any acknowledgement, if any, in support of receipt of the copy of the report of SP, Murshidabad, West Bengal as well as the Commission's letter dated 15.6.2011 by us.
On receiving your letter 12.9.2011 we contacted the victim and explained him the contents of the letter. Upon the understanding the contents of the Commission's letter, the victim voluntarily gave us one declaration in Bangla language and the scanned copy of the same is attached herewith.
In the said declaration the victim stated that on 16.11.2010 the BSF jawans of Dadarghat Out-Post took his voter identity card and did not return it. When the victim requested for return of the voter identity card, the said BSF jawans told him to collect it from Rajanagar BSF Company Head Quarter on 17.11.2010. On 17.11.2010 he went to Rajanagar BSF Company Head Quarter and there he saw Mr. Gunen Mondal, Mr. Dinesh Mondal, Mr. Krishnapada Mondal and Mr. Bimal Mondal who are smugglers and act as tout of BSF and in their presence the Camp-in-charge compelled him to put his LTI on a blank white paper and then his voter card was returned. The victim also stated in his declaration that false statements were made against Mr. Kanai Mondal in the reports submitted before the Commission. The victim also stated that his complaint against the perpetrator BSF jawans is true and he did not withdraw his complaint against the perpetrator BSF personnel.
Now we want to say few lines on the report of the SDPO, Domkal and also the report of BSF which were highlighted in your letter dated 12.9.2011.
It appears from the report of SDPO, Domkal that he neither met with the victim nor examined him during the enquiry. He even did not go through the documents which the victim had in support of his ownership of the buffalos in question. The SDPO, Domkal only contacted with the BSF authority, collected their version and more strangely he met with three persons as stated in his report to verify the ownership of the buffalos. We failed to understand as to how can any third person prove the ownership of the buffalos which allegedly belonged to the victim? It is very wrong and unjust that the SDPO, Domkal opined in his report that the buffalos in question were neither domestic nor owned by the victim only relying on the verbal statements of some third persons.
The report of the SDPO, Domkal stated that he contacted the Coy. Commander of Rajanagar BOP who corroborated the fact that on the night of 11.9.2010 at about 22.30 hrs two buffalos were found in border area at O.P. no.4 under Rajanagar BOP. Noticing those buffalos, the on-duty BSF personnel of the said O.P. seized them. On the other hand the BSF report stated that on the intervening 11/12 September 2010 at about 2230 hrs., Boat Naka Cum Patroling party of BOP Rajanagar seized two buffaloes while they illegally and forcibly smuggled from India to Bangladesh through Padma river. Therefore both reports actually differ from each other on fact as to how the BSF personnel came to seize the two buffalos; nevertheless the time and place of seizure of the two buffalos coincide with the victim's allegation of seizure of his two buffalos.
The report of SDPO, Domkal stated that the BSF kept the seized two buffalos at Char Rajanagar BOP and on 16.9.2010 they were handed over to Katlamari Customs. On the other hand the BSF report admitted that on 12.9.2010 and also on 13.9.2010 the victim went to BOP Rajanagar and claimed that the seized buffalos belonged to him. The BSF authority as it appears from the report that the BSF authority of BOP Rajanagar did not make any attempt to verify the claim of the victim over the seized buffalos upon going through the documents which victim had in support of his claim. The BSF authority can easily verify the claim of the victim if they wanted as they kept the buffalos in their custody till 16.9.2010. The BSF personnel BOP Rajanagar even did not guide the victim to the proper authority, if the BSF was not the proper authority, to claim the ownership of the seized buffalos. This alone proves the tarnished attitude of the BSF authority of depriving the victim of getting any opportunity to establish his claim/grievances.
Therefore it appears to us that the Commission failed to judge the veracity of the reports submitted before it and the case was closed hopelessly. The Commission should judge the veracity of the reports even in absence of any comments from the complainant and take appropriate action, but in this case we find that such honest move is missing from the Commission. It appears that the Commission put much weightage on the points which are favourable to the perpetrators rather judging the reports submitted before it more rationally. This leaves us with dissatisfaction with the decision of the Commission.
Hence we demand that the Commission must re-call its decision and reopen the case of the victim and direct an enquiry into the matter by the Commission's own investigating wing considering the fact that the reports submitted before it are not worth to rely upon in view of the comments made by us on the reports and also the declaration of the victim attached with this answering letter.
Thanking You,
Yours truly,
Kirity Roy
Secretary, MASUM
--
Kirity Roy
Secretary
Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha
(MASUM)
&
National Convenor (PACTI)
Programme Against Custodial Torture & Impunity
40A, Barabagan Lane (4th Floor)
Balaji Place
Shibtala
Srirampur
Hooghly
PIN- 712203
Tele-Fax - +91-33-26220843
Phone- +91-33-26220844 / 0845
e. mail : kirityroy@gmail.com
Web: www.masum.org.in
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment