Tripura High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Tripura High Court: S.G. Chattopadhyay, J., rejected a pre-arrest bail application which was filed apprehending arrest registered for offence punishable under sections 341 and 302 read with section 34 IPC.

A suo motu complaint was lodged by office in charge of the police station that at 06.25 am on the day he received a telephonic information that one person suspected to be a cattle lifter was detained by the local people at Sovaram Chow Para where presence of police was urgently required. Having arrived at the spot, complainant found that one Saiful Islam of about 18 years’ of age was lying on the street near Sovaram Chow Para SB school in an alarming condition with several cut wound in his body and the injured was not able to speak anything. The injured was shifted to Mungiakami primary health centre from where he was referred to GBP hospital. The injured succumbed to his injuries in GBP hospital at Agartala on the same day.

During investigation, police recorded the statements of some of the witnesses who witnessed the assault on Saiful Islam and saw his assailants. In the course of investigation, the post mortem examination report of the deceased and other materials were also collected by the investigating officer. On the basis of the incriminating materials collected during investigation, the investigating agency took initiative to arrest the applicant namely, Gagan Debbarma for which he has filed this application under section 438 Cr.P.C seeking protection from arrest and detention.

Mr. R. Datta, P.P. on the other hand contended that a boy of 18 years of age was brutally murdered by a mob on suspicion that he was in the team of cattle lifters and the statements of the eyewitnesses has revealed the name of the present accused petitioner as one of the members of the mob who were found chasing the deceased and killing him. After killing said Saiful Islam, his assailants tried to cause disappearance of evidence by burying his body under earth.

The Court was of the opinion that apart from the gravity of offence, there are other factors which are unfavourable to the accused applicant in this case. A young boy of 18 years was brutally lynched by a mob only on the suspicion that he was a cattle lifter even though no cattle was found in his possession. The eye witness version of some of the witnesses whose statements have been recorded by police in the course of investigation demonstrate that the present applicant was one of the members of the mob who was found chasing and lynching the deceased. The Court further relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 and Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar, (2012) 4 SCC 379 where parameters for granting or refusing the anticipatory bail were mentioned.

The Court resultantly rejected the application for pre arrest bail.[Gagan Debbarma v. State of Tripura, 2021 SCC OnLine Tri 513, decided on 08-10-2021]

Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Hot Off The PressNews

As reported by ANI, Rajasthan tabled the “Rajasthan Protection from Lynching Bill, 2019” in the State Assembly.

This objective of this bill is to prevent and punish by appointing special judges for speedy trial and rehabilitation of the lynching victims family.

The ‘Wire‘ reported, Regarding the punishment for the offence of lynching, the bill states that where the “lynching” leads to “hurt”, the convict may be punished with imprisonment up to seven years and a fine, which may extend up to Rs 1 lakh. In cases where “lynching” leads to “grievous hurt”, the convict may be punished with imprisonment – which may extend up to ten years and a fine which may extend up to Rs 3 lakh.

No officer below the rank of Insp[ector General will investigate the cases of mob lynching.

The victims will be compensated as per the Rajasthan Victim Compensation Scheme and the fine claimed would be paid to the victim or their legal heir.

[Source: ANI]

Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

National Human Rights Commission: NHRC has taken suo motu cognizance of media reports that on 20th July, 2018, a 31-year old Rakbar Khan, from Haryana’s Mewat District was attacked by a group of 8-10 cow vigilantes in Alwar district, Rajasthan and who succumbed to injuries a few hours later. The cow vigilantes have, reportedly, alleged that the victim died in police custody and not because of mob violence as claimed by the authorities. There are further reports in the print media that it took Alwar Police more than 3 hours to travel six km while taking a critically injured victim of lynching to the closest hospital, the Community Health Centre in Ramgarh.
The Commission has observed that the contents of the news reports, if true, raise a serious issue of violation of human rights of the victim man. Accordingly, it has issued notices to the Chief Secretary and DGP, Govt. of Rajasthan calling for reports in the matter within two weeks.
According to the media reports dated 22nd July, 2018, the victim of mob lynching, in his dying statement, told the police that he and his friend were walking back with two cows they had bought when they came under attack in Alwar’s Ramgarh area by the mob, which accused them of being smugglers taking the cattle for slaughter. Reportedly, rather than saving the life of the victim, the two cows recovered from him seemed to have been the priority of police. The cows were taken to gaushala 10 km away, a good one hour before the victim of mob lynching was brought to the CHC, dead.

National Human Rights Commission


Hot Off The PressNews

Government is concerned at the incidents of violence by mobs in some parts of the country. Government has already condemned such incidents and made its stand clear in the Parliament that it is committed to upholding the rule of law and adopting effective measures to curb such incidents.

As per the Constitutional scheme, ‘Police’ and ‘Public Order’ are State subjects. State Governments are responsible for controlling crime, maintaining law and order, and protecting the life and property of the citizens. They are empowered to enact and enforce laws to curb crime in their jurisdiction.

Accordingly, Ministry of Home Affairs has, from time to time, issued advisories to States/UTs for maintenance of public order and prevention of crime in their areas of jurisdiction. An advisory on addressing the issue of lynching by mob on suspicion of child lifting was issued on 04.07.2018. Earlier, an advisory was issued on 09.08.2016 on disturbances by miscreants in the name of protection of cow.

Government respects the recent directions of the Supreme Court on the issue of mob violence, and has issued an advisory to State Governments urging them to take effective measures to prevent incidents of mob violence and lynching and to take stringent action as per law. The State Governments have been advised to implement the directions issued in the matter by the Supreme Court on July 17, 2018.

In order to formulate appropriate measures to address the situation, Government has set up a high level committee chaired by the Union Home Secretary to deliberate in the matter and make recommendations. The Secretary, Department of Justice, Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs, Secretary, Legislative Department and Secretary, Social Justice and Empowerment are the members of the committee. The committee will submit its recommendations to the Government within 4 weeks.

Government has further decided to constitute a Group of Ministers headed by the Union Home Minister to consider the recommendations of the high level committee. The Minister, External Affairs, Minister, Road Transport and Highways; Shipping, Water Resources, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation, Minister, Law & Justice and Minister, Social Justice and Empowerment are the members of Group of Ministers. The Group of Ministers will submit their recommendations to the Prime Minister.

Ministry of Home Affairs