1. Home
  2. SC flays use of 'excessive force' in disturbed areas

SC flays use of 'excessive force' in disturbed areas

July 9, 2016

New Delhi, Jul 9: The Supreme Court on Friday said the use of “excessive force” by armed forces or police was not permissible in ‘disturbed areas’ under the AFSPA.

scObserving that the situation in Manipur has “never been one of war”, the court said killing citizens on suspicion that they are the “enemy” gravely endangers the democracy.

While dealing with a PIL, which complained of 1,528 extra-judicial killings in the state from 2000 to 2012 by security forces and police, it said, “If members of our armed forces are deployed and employed to kill citizens of our country on the mere allegation or suspicion that they are ‘enemy’, not only the rule of law, but our democracy would be in grave danger.”

The court, which directed a thorough probe into charges of fake encounter killings, said an inquest was needed “to know the truth” in Manipur where “we need to be clear that the situation has never been one of a war or an external aggression or an armed rebellion that threatens the security of the country or a part thereof.”

Delivering an 85-page verdict, the top court said “the public order situation in Manipur is, at best, an internal disturbance”. A bench of Justices M B Lokur and U U Lalit said that before branding a person a terrorist or insurgent, “there must be a commission or some attempt or semblance of a violent overt act”.

It said the armed forces “do not supplant the civil administration but only supplement it” and added that their deployment was “intended to restore normalcy and it would be extremely odd if normalcy was not restored within some reasonable period, certainly not an indefinite period or an indeterminate period”.

“A distinction must be drawn between the right of self defence or private defence and use of excessive force or retaliation. Very simply put, the right of self defence or private defence is a right that can be exercised to defend oneself but not to retaliate,” the bench said.

The bench also referred to an earlier verdict which cautioned against use of retaliatory force even against a dreaded criminal.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
August 4,2020

New Delhi, Aug 4: India witnessed a single-day spike of 52,050 COVID-19 cases as the total cases in the country reached 18,55,746, the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare said on Tuesday.

803 COVID-19 related deaths were reported in the last 24 hours. The total cases include 5,86,298 active cases, 12,30,510 cured/discharged/migrated and 38,938 deaths, the Health Ministry added.

Maharashtra continues to be the worst-affected state as it has a total of 1,47,324 active cases and 15,842 deaths. A total of 4,50,196 coronavirus cases have been recorded in the state up to Monday, according to Union Ministry of Health.

Tamil Nadu reported 5,609 new COVID-19 cases and 109 deaths on Monday, taking total cases to 2,63,222 including 2,02,283 discharges and 4,241 deaths, the state Health Department said.

The total cases in Delhi have risen to 1,38,482 including 1,24,254 recovered/discharged/migrated cases and 4,021 deaths, according to the Ministry of Health.

Meanwhile, India recorded the highest single-day testing by conducting over 6.6 lakh tests to diagnose COVID-19 in the last 24 hours.
"In its fight against COVID-19, India scales a new high of 6,61,715 tests in the last 24 hours," said the Health Ministry in a tweet.

A total of 2,08,64,206 samples for COVID-19 have been tested across the country so far, said the Health Ministry.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 4,2020

Srinagar, Apr 4: Two militants were reportedly killed in an encounter with security forces in Kulgam district of Jammu and Kashmir on Saturday, police said.

The security forces launched a cordon and search operation based on intelligence inputs about the presence of militants in Hardmand Guri village in Kulgam, a police spokesperson said.

"This operation based on a credible police input was launched this morning. Two terrorists have been reportedly killed so far," the spokesperson said, adding that the exchange of fire was going on.

Earlier, the police tweeted on its official handle that three militants had been trapped in the cordon. "Same group of #terrorists trapped who killed 3 civilians recently," the police said.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 19,2020

New Delhi, Jun 19: RJD and AAP were not invited to the all-party meeting called by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday to discuss the situation at the India-China border after 20 Indian soldiers were killed in a "violent face-off," leaving the parties fuming.

Top RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav criticised the government for not inviting the party to the meeting, asking on Twitter late Thursday night, "Just wish to know the criteria for inviting political parties for tomorrow's (Friday's) all-party meet on Galwan Valley. I mean the grounds of inclusion/exclusion. Because our party hasn't received any message so far."

AAP's Rajya Sabha leader Sanjay Singh joined the chorus, "there is a strange ego-driven government at the centre. AAP has a government in Delhi and is the main opposition in Punjab. We have four MPs. But on a vital subject, AAP's views are not needed? The country is waiting for what the Prime Minister will say at the meeting."

Sources said the government has set a criteria to invite only parties with five or more MPs in Parliament for the digital meet, where the Prime Minister will brief the top leaders of parties and hear their views on the way ahead. There are at least 27 parties in the Parliament, which have less than five members, while 17 have more than five members or more than five MPs.

Interestingly, RJD has five MPs in Rajya Sabha and its senior MP Manoj K Jha shared the Rajya Sabha website link on Twitter, which showed the party has five MPs. "We have not been invited and the government's bogus argument has been exposed," Jha said.

CPI leaders said General Secretary D Raja received a call from Defence Minister Rajnath Singh inviting him to the meeting and with a message that the Prime Minister's Office would coordinate but there was no follow-up after that.

"Exclusion of AAP and RJD in the all-party meet on a National debate does not augment well. AAP is ruling Delhi and has its CM. Why should people of Delhi be kept out in such an important debate on National integrity and Sovereignty?" former NCP MP Majeed Memon tweeted.

During the all-party meeting on COVID-19 too, the government had not called all parties with representation in Parliament to the all-party meeting in April and had set five MPs as a benchmark to be invited.

Raja had then written a letter to Modi demanding that the government should not get into "technicalities" and discuss the issue with all parties in Parliament.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.