.jpg)
Compensation Awarded through HRLN Manipur to Victim of Unjustified Killing by Assam Rifles
Source: Google Images
15th July 2010
Today the Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench has disposed of a Writ Petition filed by Sagolshem Ongbi Latani Devi for unjustified killing of her husband Sagolshem Vikram Singh aged about 22 years, of Keirao Bitra Awang Leikai, Imphal East District on 3rd October 2006 by the personnel of 34 Assam Rifles.
A division bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tayenjam Nandakumar Singh and Hon’ble Justice K. Meruno has issued the judgment and order thereby directing the Assam Rifles authority to pay a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakh only) as compensation to the Petitioner within four months. Further the Hon’ble High Court has directed to pay another sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) as fee to the counsel for the Petitioner. Shri Meihoubam Rakesh, Advocate appeared on behalf of the Petitioner. The Petitioner contended in her Writ Petition that in the year 2004 Sagolshem Vikram Singh was arrested by the police on the allegation that he was member of People Liberation Army (PLA), a proscribed organization and was detained under National Security Act, 1980 for one year. After releasing from the jail he married to Konthoujam Latani Devi and stayed at the parental house of his wife at Nongbrang village by doing quarry work at Thoubal River to eke out a living.
On 3rd October 2006 at around 4 a.m. said Sagolshem Vikram Singh was arrested from the house of his wife by a team of 34 Assam Rifles personnel stationed at Yairipok. At the time of his arrest the Assam Rifles personnel did not issue any arrest Memo and no incriminating articles were seized from his possession. Thereafter he was taken to the Thoubal River bank which is about 50 meter away from the house of the Petitioner to the north and he was shot death in a fake encounter. Thereafter the personnel of 34 Assam Rifles lodged a false report to the Yairipok Police Station alleging that Vikram was killed in an encounter and they recovered a pistol from his possession.
The very act of 34 Assam Rifles personnel amounts to violation of right to life enshrined in the Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence the writ petition was filed praying for punishment of the errant Assam Rifles personnel and claiming adequate compensation under the public law domain.
Before passing the present judgment and order the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court had directed the learned District Judge, Manipur West to hold an enquiry to ascertain the facts and circumstances leading to death of Sagolshem Vikram Singh. In pursuance of the said order, the learned District Judge, Manipur West had conducted her inquiry and submitted her inquiry report ascertaining that Sagolshem Vikram Singh was arrested from the house of his wife in the early morning of 3rd October 2006. Further he was not killed in an encounter between the personnel of 34 Assam Rifles and the U.Gs. in the early morning of 3rd October 2006. It is also held that the facts and circumstances leading to the death of the said deceased are that Sagolshem Vikram Singh was arrested from the house of his wife at Nongbrang village by the personnel of 34 Assam Rifles without any charge and was killed near the bank of Thoubal river.
After analyzing the said inquiry report and hearing the submissions of the counsels for the parties, the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court has accepted the said report and as such the Court has directed the Respondent No. 1 to 4 to pay above mentioned amount as compensation within four months.
The Respondents listed in the case include (i) The Union of India, represented by the Defence Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, (ii) The Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, (iii) The General Officer Commanding (GOC), 57 Mountain Division, (iv) The Commanding Officer, 34 Assam Rifles, (v) The State of Manipur represented by the principal Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur (vi) The Director General of Police, Manipur and (vii) The Superintendent of Police, Imphal East District.
The present Writ Petition is being filed at the initiative of Human Rights Law Network (Manipur).
Meihoubam Rakesh,
Director,
Human Rights Law Network (Manipur),
KVIC Building, 2nd Floor, Opposite Videocon House,
Paona Bazar, Imphal - 795001.
Mobile:- +919436021438
Land line:- 0385-2442165 (O), 0385-2461340 (R)
Pass 33% Women Bill Now!
APPEAL
Gender equality which is the base of social justice and development is a far cry in this country. For a correlation between gender gap and national competitiveness women’s participation in critical areas of development is must.
Women who constitute 50% of the Indian population are represented by mere 8% in Parliament. It is a shocking contrast with the entire notion of democracy.
Women as citizens of the nation have a right to half the seats in Parliament and State legislatures giving them access to influence decisions that affect the nation, politically, economically, socially.
Women are not asking for grace and charity. As 50% of adult population and third of official work force, they perform nearly two third of their life working. They receive a tenth of world income and own less than one percent of world property Therefore reservation is not a bounty but honest recognition of their contribution to social development.
For over 14 years, women’s organizations have been demanding the introduction and passing of the Women's Reservation Bill, which would give them a say in the policy decisions of the country.
First introduced by Prime Minister H.D Deve Godha in 1996 it went through four failed attempts by NDA Government in 1998,1999,2002,2003. The Bill was finally introduced in the Rajya Sabha in May 2010 but is yet to be tabled in the Lok Sabha.
Taking the initiative to show solidarity many organizations have decided to join forces and as a part of the struggle would be staging a demonstration with over 5000 people at 11 O’clock, on the 29th July 2010 at Jantar Mantar. We would like you to be the partners in this effort and look forward to your participation at the demonstration.
We would also like you to join us in the signature campaign by sending as many signatures as possible on a cloth banner with the slogan ‘PASS 33% women’s bill NOW’ and the name of your State, measuring 5x3 yards as per format attached to us.
Your solidarity to the cause will give strength for this fight for justice and equality of opportunities and make dream of reservation of seats in the parliament for women a reality.
Show solidarity by sending us your names at wji.delhi@hrln.org we will print them on our banner and send your banners to:
HRLN
576 Masjid Road
Jungpura,
New Delhi – 110014
Public Consultation on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill 2010
Call to scrap Nuclear Liability Bill
As reported in Hindu, Mumbai on 8th July 2010
A Public Consultation on the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill 2010 on Wednesday held it unconstitutional and violative of the right to life and demanded that it be scrapped.
The Bill is currently with the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology, which in an advertisement on June 24 had called for wider consultations to include public opinion on the Bill.
Organised by the University of Mumbai's Law Department, Greenpeace India and Human Rights Law Network (HRLN), the consultation is an attempt to put forward a strong people's mandate against the Bill by the time it comes up for discussion before the Standing Committee between July 13 to 17.
“Time not enough”
Priya Pillai, policy analyst with Greenpeace India, said that despite demands for a wider consultation, the government gave 15 days' time and notices were published only in the English media. On Tuesday, a public hearing was held in Hyderabad attended by over 70 people. People had very little time to express their opinions on the Bill, which according to the HRLN “represents a travesty of Indian common law and does nothing to protect Indian citizens in the case of a nuclear disaster.”
Prof. Suresh Mane, head of the Department of Law, University of Mumbai, set the ball rolling by asking if this Bill was really necessary. He said it was aimed at pleasing the private players in nuclear energy who wanted a cap on civil liability. Countries such as Canada have no cap in case of a nuclear accident on liability, he pointed out.
Read the full Article.
As reported in Hindu, Mumbai on 8th July 2010
A Public Consultation on the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill 2010 on Wednesday held it unconstitutional and violative of the right to life and demanded that it be scrapped.
The Bill is currently with the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology, which in an advertisement on June 24 had called for wider consultations to include public opinion on the Bill.
Organised by the University of Mumbai's Law Department, Greenpeace India and Human Rights Law Network (HRLN), the consultation is an attempt to put forward a strong people's mandate against the Bill by the time it comes up for discussion before the Standing Committee between July 13 to 17.
“Time not enough”
Priya Pillai, policy analyst with Greenpeace India, said that despite demands for a wider consultation, the government gave 15 days' time and notices were published only in the English media. On Tuesday, a public hearing was held in Hyderabad attended by over 70 people. People had very little time to express their opinions on the Bill, which according to the HRLN “represents a travesty of Indian common law and does nothing to protect Indian citizens in the case of a nuclear disaster.”
Prof. Suresh Mane, head of the Department of Law, University of Mumbai, set the ball rolling by asking if this Bill was really necessary. He said it was aimed at pleasing the private players in nuclear energy who wanted a cap on civil liability. Countries such as Canada have no cap in case of a nuclear accident on liability, he pointed out.
Read the full Article.
Bleeding Kashmir
AGAINST KILLINGS OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS IN KASHMIR
Bleeding paradise... Pictures by Nadiya Naden'ka
Bleeding paradise... Pictures by Nadiya Naden'ka
HRLN's achievement : Shelter home for People Living with HIV/AIDS
Women with HIV/AIDS in India face a disproportionate burden of discrimination. Their families often abandon them once their HIV status becomes known and they have a difficult time finding employment. Faced with trying economic circumstances it not uncommon for these women to have a difficult time accessing proper shelter for themselves and their dependents. A plan developed in 2001 sanctioned the creation of fifty women’s shelters in West Bengal; however only five of these have opened thus far. In this case, the Petitioner’s husband abandoned the farmer after he learned she was HIV positive, leaving her to care for her two young children and elderly mother on her own. She was unable to afford her rent and was turned out of her home, moving, along with her family, to a railway station to seek shelter. The South 24 Parganas Network of People living with HIV/AIDS (SNP+) found accommodation for the Petitioner at Alor Disha Community Centre. The community centre is intended for temporary residence only; however the Petitioner, her children and her mother have been refused at all government-run and private shelters in the area, on the basis of the Petitioner’s HIV status.
The Respondents, Ministry of Women and Child Development of India, the State of West Bengal, Departments for Women and Child Development, Social Welfare and Health and Family Welfare, have agreed to provide shelter to the Petitioner as well as necessary social benefits such as nutrition and education for her education. The High Court ordered that the State also file an affidavit within eight weeks, declaring their planned steps to combat discrimination in the state.
Click here for Court Order
