LUDHIANA: India has launched a brutal campaign against Sikh lawyers in the state of Punjab. Main targets are those who have been opposing the state repression let loose on Sikh activists engaged in the on-going Sikh struggle for an independent and sovereign state, and rendering legal aid to them in judicial courts. Four Sikh lawyers have been liquidated by the Indian security forces as a result of this campaign.
According to International Human Rights Organization (IHRO), at least 13 lawyers are said to be on the police hit-list, and the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association President Gian Chand Dhuriwala has advised some of the “marked” lawyers to go elsewhere to save their lives. In the recent past, three Sikh lawyersKulwant Singh of Ropar along with his wife and two-year-old son, Jagwinder Singh of Kapurthala and Ranbir Singh of Bathinda have been killed by the police after they were clandestinely taken into custody. According to IHRO, a fourth lawyer from Sangrur, Sukhwinder Singh Bhatti was abducted by the police on May 12 last year. IHRO Chairman DS Gill, accompanied by John Dahlburg, New Delhi Bureau Chief of the Los Angeles Times, investigated the case of this disappearance. Having made spot inquiries, they concluded that Bhatti was picked up by the police. IHRO believed that Bhatti was marked for harassment, torture or suspected elimination mainly because of his activities and responsibilities as a lawyer.
IHRO was intrigued to hear from certain members of the district bar that a DSP Sukhdev Singh Brar could be the culprit against whom Bhatti had filed a criminal complaint in court for torturing an Akali activist, Baldev Singh. The torture victim disclosed that certain police officials had threatened him that he and Bhatti would be eliminated in case they did not withdraw the complaint. The complaint is pending before the chief judicial magistrate, Sangrur.
Meanwhile, the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a writ petition has or 3 dered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to enquire into the disappearance of Bhatti. The High Court order reads: “This Court after hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and going through the record. of the case is of the considered view that even though for the time being there may be no case for suspending and transferring Superintendents of f Police of Sangrur and Barnala, yet there is ample justification in the facts and circumstances of the case to order enquiry leading to abduction of Sukhwinder Singh Bhatti, Advocate and to locate his whereabouts by an independent agency i.e. CBI. It is not denied that it is the fourth case of the kind where a practicing lawyer about whom it is not denied that he was defending persons alleged to have been involved in militant activities had been missing and there is no clue of him even though the police had made through investigation details whereof have been given while dealing with the replies filed by the respondents in this case. First in the point of time, Ranbir Singh Mansahia, an Advocate of Bathinda, who was engaged to defend persons involved in militant activities, was kidnapped about three years ago and his whereabouts are not known till date. Thereafter, Jogwinder Singh an Advocate of Kapurthala was kidnapped under similar circumstances who too, it is the case of the petitioner and not denied in the replies filed, was defending similar persons. in the recent past, Kulwant Singh Advocate of Ropar who too was defending persons involved in militant activities along with his wife and 1 1/2 years old son was picked up and dead bodies of all of them were found in a canal. It is rather interesting to note that even though in the matter of Kulwant Singh and his family the police had submitted a challan but in as much as apprehension of lawyer fraternity was that the real accused were being shielded and putting up of challan was only a measure to hush up the matter and therefore their plea that an enquiry should be made by an independent agency like CBI prevailed with Apex Court.
In Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association vs. State of Punjab AIR 1994 SC 1023. The aforesaid 3 plea, however, had failed in the case before this Court but while dealing with the matter in the Special Leave Petition which was filed against decision of this Court, the Supreme Court observed that investigation having been completed by the police and charge-sheet submitted to the Court, s it is not for Supreme Court, ordinarily to re-open the investigation but nevertheless, in the facts and circumstances of the instant case to do complete justice in the matter and to instill confidence in the public mind, it was necessary to have a fresh investigation in this case through specialized agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation, CBI was directed to take up the investigation in the case. It was further observed that, “High Court was wholly unjustified in closing its eyes and ears to the controversy which had shocked the lawyer fraternity in the region.” It was also observed that the High Court had failed to perform the duty entrusted to it under the Constitution.
“It is by now well settled by series of judgments given by Supreme Court that an enquiry can be directed by appropriate agency for preservation and protection of fundamental rights. There is no need to detail all judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter. Suffice it to mention some of these cases reported in Bandhua Mukti v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 82; Mukesh Advani v. State of M.P. AIR 1985 SC 1363 and Sheela Barse v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 1773: (1988 Cri LJ 1736) which show that High Court should make enquiry directly but where in a case the High Court finds it difficult to make inquiry or investigation directly as it is difficult to take evidence without which the question in dispute cannot satisfactorily be decided, the party approaching the High Court for enforcement of fundamental rights is not in a position to furnish all the relevant materials and necessary particulars.
“As mentioned above, it is not the first case of the lawyer disappearing in the State of Punjab in mysterious circumstances. The police could not trace out any but Kulwant Singh whose dead body along with the dead bodies of his wife and child was found in a canal. it may be coincidence that all the four lawyers were defending persons involved in the militants activities but this fact in itself is enough to create an impression of the kind that the petitioner and lawyer fraternity had entertained in the present case. It is for this reason that it cannot be said that the view of lawyer fraternity which, of course, does not go beyond the realm of apprehension is ill founded or is not based on cogent grounds. That a part, in a case of this kind, it cannot be even remotely urged 31 by the respondents that Courts should not order investigation by specialized agency and if the police is not involved in the matter as is obviously its case, there should be an all out effort C by all concerned to find out the truth. “It is more than 40 days that Bhatti 1 was abducted. Investigation done by the police has brought no tangible results. The Additional Advocate General, Punjab, appearing for the State of Punjab has repeatedly informed the Court on the basis of instructions given to him that Bhatti is likely to be traced. He sought for time in the matter but an adjourned date came up with no information whatsoever which might show any substantial progress in the matter. On the date when the arguments concluded, he was told to inform the Court before the judgment was pronounced, if there was any clue with regard to whereabouts of Bhatti, but as mentioned above, no information has been received by the Court in this regard. It, thus, may be a case of the respondents that police officers are not involved in the matter but it is definitely a case where they have at least failed to trace Bhatti or to have even a scant clue with regard to his even being dead or alive.
“The petition has also prayed for compensation to be given to the family of Sukhwinder Singh Bhatti but that request in the very nature of things is premature and cannot be entertained at this stage.
“For the reasons recorded above, this petition is allowed and it is ordered that abduction of Sukhwinder Singh Bhatti, Advocate, who reportedly was picked up on May 12, 1994 near Bahadurpur should be inquired and investigated by Central Bureau of Investigation and that too by an officer of the rank of S.P. To be precise S.P., Central Bureau of Investigation, Chandigarh, would be the officer who shall enquire and investigate the mat ter. It is further ordered that he shall be assisted in the matter by the Punjab Police, if he so requires. He would proceed in the matter immediately and conclude the inquiry/investigation as expeditiously as possible and submit his report within three months from today. A copy of this order be sent to S.P., Central Bureau of Investigation, Chandigarh forthwith.”
Article extracted from this publication >> March 10, 1995
