(Courtesy: The Sikh Review, Tapas Chakraborty) Readers may recall the report “Darkness at Noon,” by Dr. Ashok Mitra, published in the August 1993 issue of The Sikh Review. What appears below is a sequel to those sordid deeds of the trigger-happy and wholly amoral Punjab Police, a: reported recently in the columns of The Telegraphs, Calcutta Ed. S.R.

More than a year after his arrest by the West Bengal CID and his transfer to Punjab, the whereabouts ‘of the “dreaded militant,” Swaran Singh, are yet to be ascertained.

A Sikh couple Lakhsmi Singh alias Basir Ali and his wife Rani Singh was gunned down at Tiljala by the Punjab Police on the same day last year as Swaran Singh, also arrested from Tijala earlier, ‘on his way to the Ali pore Court.

With the media shifting its focus ‘on the couple’s murder, public attention was weaned away from the Swaran Singh case. Even as the Supreme Court passed severe ‘Tinctures on the Punjab Police and directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) recently to begin a fresh probe into the murder, the Swaran Singh case did not get much publicity. ‘Son of Darshan Singh of Dhinger Village, Swaran Singh, a wanted militant, fled Punjab in 1991 and saws staying at Picnic Garden Road. He was arrested by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) last year and forwarded to the court. Swaran was booked for a series of cases involving abduction, murder and conspiracy against the state. On May 31, the superintendent of police, Sangrur district, Punjab, requisitioned him from the state as he was wanted in a separate case in Punjab. A team of officials from Punjab came soon after and took him to Sangrur. A month after the transfer, messages were sent seeking his return whenever the case came up for hearing in the Ali pore court, Calcutta. ‘Till May this year, the Punjab Police failed to inform the Ali pore court about Swaran Singh’s whereabouts. In fact, the acting SDJM, Sajal Ghosh, had made an adverse remark on the Punjab Police’s strange silence regarding the case. ‘The Punjab Police finally replied on June 30, 1994. In their report (message no. 7587) top the Ali pore Court, the Punjab: Police said Swaran Singh had “escaped from police custody” on June 8, 1993. A warrant (1775/4) ‘Was issued in his name a year later. The Punjab police said Swaran Singh had “escaped” from their custody while they were returning from Ghasiwal village after recovering a rocket launcher, which, Swaran, in his statement, allegedly said had been planted by him. ‘The Punjab police statement was challenged in the Supreme Court through a want petition (CRL no. 287) since their version appeared to have many loopholes. ‘The fact that the warrant against Swaran Singh was issued a year after his escape has raised many eyebrows. Other inconsistencies were also detected in the story during the hearing. The Supreme ‘Court then directed the CBI to conduct a fresh probe. Following the order, a CBI team began the probe in August this year. They made enquiries at Picnic Gardens, Calcutta about Swaran Singh’s acquaintances more than a year after his escape.

It was learned that Swaran never visited Picnic Gardens after his “escape.” While the CBI is still scrutinizing the case records made available to them by the CID, the investigating officials feel that the chances of unraveling the mystery are bleak.

A Court Verdict (contributed) The Supreme Court recently passed severe strictures on Punjab. Police and its Director-general for neglecting the complaint on the abduction of several people about the three years ago, allegedly by a senior Punjab Police officer and his men. The court also directed Director, CBI, to investigate “personality” the circumstances relating to the alleged abduction of the seven members aged between 14 and 85 years of a Sikh family.

The Chief Justice, N. Venkatchalliah and Justice A.S. Anand and Justice S.P. Bharucha directed the CBI chief to submit a report of the investigation within four weeks and the State of Punjab to ensure all assistance to the CBI.

The court expressed dissatisfaction over the leisurely manner in which Punjab Police had acted on a complaint received in January 1992. Despite an affirmative report on ‘independent inquiry,” it was not unreasonable to conclude the in vestigations of Punjab Police would lead nowhere, it said, “We are deeply concerned about the safety of the citizenry at the hands of such an errant highhanded and unchecked police force,” the court added.

Considering this, it was “unwilling to entrust the investigations of the abduction, and presumable liquidation,” of the seven people, to the Punjab Police.

According to the petitioner, S. Inder Singh, son of one of those abducted, a police patrol, led by the District Superintendent of Police, Baldev Singh, came to his house on October 19, 1991, and took into custody seven people.

‘They were Sadhu Singh, Amarjit Singh, and Hardev Singh, Devinder ‘Singh, Sukhdev Singh and Saranjit Singh.

‘The habeas corpus petition before the Supreme Court was filed on July 27, 1994, after efforts to trace their whereabouts had failed. ‘The court after referring to various affidavits said it was clear the missing persons were not wanted by Punjab Police in connection ‘with any criminal offence.

‘The State submitted that investigations had revealed Baldev Singh ‘was guilty of causing the abduction of seven people in 1991 in complicity with other policemen.

‘The court said, according to K.P.S. Gill’s affidavit, the first complaint on this behalf was made to him, and achieved in his office ‘on January 25, 1992.

His affidavit said he knew nothing of the matter till a writ petition was filed in July 1994.

Gill also stated that investigations revealed the DSP had abducted the seven people on the suspicion that they had his brother abducted by militants. It was “highly regrettable that a member of the police force should have resorted to retaliatory action, and taken the law into his own hands,” the court observed.

Incidentally, the petitioner’s family was allegedly told that it would receive the bodies of the seven if the DSP’s brother was not found. ‘The court said it did not agree with Gill’s view that the “majesty of the law will prevail eventually by bringing the guilty to the court of law for receiving suitable punishments,” remarking “not if things were left to the Punjab Police.”

“In our view, the majesty of law will prevail,” the judges said, adding that Gill appeared not have considered this in the eventuality of the seven abducted people being found alive, or more likely ‘dead! The judges termed as “outrageous” Gill’s submission that, since the charge sheet had already been filed in the case, the court should treat the writ petition as infructuous.

‘They said they were “unmissed” by Gill’s assertion that incidents of the kind mentioned! In the petition are deviant behavior and an aberration on the part of individual members of the force.”

The judges pointed out that the; petition had listed the various lice stations where the seven abducted people were lodged from, time to time, till Dec.28, 1991. “We cannot but wonder whether, Station House Officers of the police stations of Punjab are not alert that there are strangers in their lockups and do not feel it necessary to find out how these strangers’ came to be there,” the Court said.

Article extracted from this publication >>  December 23, 1994