NEW DELHI: The People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR) has accused the North-West district police of firing on a mob in Ashok Vihar on January 30 to cover-up the death of a youth at the hands of the police.

Presenting a report on the firing, the forum said the police fired indiscriminately in which four people were killed and several others injured to deflect the blame of the custodial death of the youth, Dilip.

The report said it had been established beyond a doubt that Dilip had died due to torture, beating and kicking him while in police custody. “The post mortem examination has confirmed the injuries, the report said.

The report claimed Dillip. 18 from Allahabad had come to see the Republic-Day celebrations in January and was staying with some relatives in the Jhuggi cluster adjoining the park in Ashok Vihar.

On that day Dilip went to defecate in a park, located between the slum cluster and the residential colony. The residents had already got a boundary-wall built round the park to stop alleged trespassers from the slum areas coming into it

The residents also had secured a stay order from Delhi High Court preventing the park from being used as a “public lavatory.

The PUDR report said the victim was unaware of the court directive, and went into the park. Two constables patrolling the area caught him and beat him up. leading to his death, the report said.

Later, while trying to release the dead body from police custody, the agitated jhuggi residents resorted to stone throw

The PUDR fact-finding team said the police claim that the firing took place only after the mob began attacking the residents, was wrong.

“The firing was revengeful and was directed to humble and humiliate those protesting the death in custody.” the report said and added that three people were killed on the spot, with 17 admit ted to a hospital of whom one succumbed to injuries a day later.

“The police took positions on the rail track and fired at the mob, and later entered into the houses, beating people and smashing their belongings, reports said.

The inquiry report by the SDM is yet to be made public. The report said it seems that it has been made subservient to the larger enquiry, probably to ensure consistent conclusions.

Article extracted from this publication >> April 14, 1995