The police then photographed the bodies and reportedly cremated them in the early morning of July 13. The photographs appeared in the newspapers on July 14. Superintendent Tripathi told reporters that the police had killed the ten “militants” in “fierce encounters” in the forest. He claimed that the first took place Phagunai Ghat at 8:00 p.m. on July 12, the second near the Panabaghi forest in Pooranpur at 11:30 p.m. and the third on July 13 at 3:00 am.20” The families were never informed by the police about the killings, nor were they given any opportunity to claim the bodies. The following police officials have been identified as among those who took the eleven men in custody: Superintendent R. D. Tripathi, Superintendent Brijender Sharma of the Pilibhit police station, Station House Officer (SHO) Harpal Singh of the Gajraula police station; SHO C. P. Singh Yadev of Nuria; and SHO Rajesh Sharma of the Tanda police station.
In an affidavit filed before the Supreme Court, the bus driver, Musaraf Hussain, stated that after the remaining passengers disembarked at the Gurdwara in Pilibhit, he was ordered to return to the police station where he was warned by police officers not to talk about the incident, and if he was asked about it to state that he had dropped all of the passengers in Pilibhit. On July 17, Hussain was questioned about the incident by an intelligence officer from New Delhi. Afterwards, he was again called to the police station. State police officers asked him if he had “met anyone from Delhi.” When he denied having done so, the officers warned him not to meet with “anyone from Delhi”, but that if he was forced to give a statement he should say only that “he had dropped the pilgrimage party at the same place from where he had taken them,” that “nothing untoward happened on the way,” and that “his bus was not stopped by the police” nor was anyone taken into custody on the way. Hussain was then ordered to sign a number of papers and released.
Two days later, Hussain was again called to the police station and ordered to sign another set of papers upon which something had been written that he was not allowed to read. After leaving the police station, Musaraf Hussain did not return home out of fear of the police but stayed with friends in Pilibhit. Later that night the police came to his home where his family told them that Hussain had left for the town of Bareilly. Other bus drivers later told Hussain’s family that the police had stopped all the buses going towards Bareilly to search for Hussain. Since July 19, the police have frequently visited his family to question them about Hussain’s whereabouts.21
The police have also harassed some of the witnesses attempting to file affidavits in the Supreme Court. In one instance, a police van followed the witnesses through the streets to the Supreme Court and entered the Gurdwara where the witnesses were staying before being chased away.
Since the killings, the Pilibhit police have issued notices to Sikh men stating, “We have information that you have contacts with the militants and you are helping them.22 The notices also warned them that “helping or harboring terrorists” is a violation of the Indian Penal Code and the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act (TADA). Since the incident, the detention of Sikh men in the region on charges of “harboring terrorists” has increased.
—————————————–
20 Ajay Singh, “Pilibhit Victims were Pilgrims,” Times of India, July 18, 1991.
21 In the affidavit, Hussain has requested the Supreme Court to order protection for him, and to permit Justice K.P. Singh, the head the commission of inquiry, to hear his testimony in Delhi, as he is afraid to return to Uttar Pradesh. Supreme Court of India, Writ Petition No. 804 of 1991: Syed Musaraf Hussain vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
22While some of these notices had been sent before the Pilibhit incident, there has been a marked increase in the appearance of these notices since July 12. See “SGPC Protest on Notices to Terai Sikhs,” Tribune, August 28, 1991.
