Saturday, July 11, 2009

Jan Commission 'Findings'

Jan Commission was equipped to 
find out what happened and make recommendations for future improvements, instead it said nothing but confused the critical issue. Even blamed the family. Here are excerpts of the report, if at all, it is worth calling the report 

"Considering the overall facts and attendant circumstances of the present incident, it appears that the deliberate inaction of police left un‐explained, is not a bonafide omission, caused by an error of judgement, or a genuinely wrong interpretation of statute, or a mistaken notion of procedure, but seems to be a deliberate attempt to dilute and mellow down this incident. 

Weighing the pros and cons of the consistent connivance, in the initial stage of investigation, by the investigating agency, and the subsequent cover up and manoeuvring by the local police, showing no seriousness in the incident, leads to the irresistible inference that the police had more to hide than to reveal. The only aspect that has to be considered is, why should the police try to cover up facts from the public gaze, was it because of incompetence, or indifference or out of fear of public exposure.
In the statements of all police witnesses, it is admitted that they were aware of the procedure to protect the evidence. It cannot by any stretch of imagination be held that all officers were, incompetent or ignorant of law, and in any case ignorance of law is no excuse. The police concerned do not appear to be indifferent. All the officers of the department stood by the theory of death by drowning
with full knowledge, and belief that no one in the recent, or past history of Shopian has died due to drowning in River Rambi Ara. The official statement of drowning does not convey the mindset of indifference, but depicts an active, intelligent and conscious effect to divert the attention of public from the actual and factual cause of death.
The dead bodies of both Neelofar and Asiya were deposited at two spots in the river Rambi Ara, which area is by day and night watching by security guards of police and CRPF. It does not appeal to reason that an individual civilian would, on his own, take a grave risk of detection, by carrying the dead bodies in the early hours of the morning of 30th May, 2009 between 2.30am to 5.30am, with full knowledge that his suspicious movements at odd hours would attract the attention of security guard,s posted in the area, unless the person would be sure of connivance from the watchful vision of the guards. 
In the normal course of human conduct, any person intending to get rid of two dead bodies in a hurry, would attempt to deposit the dead bodies at the nearest available spot, the person would normally leave sufficient trails to trace the culprit.
In the present case, the disposal of dead bodies in the centre of security ring, with mathematical precision and like surgical operation to ensure that no visible trails are left, cannot be said to be the handiwork of a private individual but would need the support of some agency.
The Commission, being aware of its delicate duty to uphold the majesty of law, has also a duty to identify the person or persons, who may, under law, be responsible for the present ruthless crime.To identify the real culprit, extensive investigation, by a competent and
dedicated team of professional investigators, with all modern facilities, is required. The intensive investigation is bound to take some more time. The Commission with time constraint of a few days more, and limitations to confine its report to the points under reference, thereby restricting the jurisdiction of the investigation, the Commission cannot undertake detailed investigation, which may require raids, search, arrest, detention for sustained interrogation of number of persons suspected of the commission of the crime.
Although conclusive evidence to identify the culprit, has not been furnished before the Commission because of unfortunate obstructions caused by certain dissenting political parties in the working of the Commission, yet there is material on the file to hold, that the involvement of some agency of J&K police, in the present incident, cannot be completely ruled out.
The reference (ii) (b) is accordingly answered.
Justice Muzaffar Jan (Retd.)
One Man Commission of Inquiry Camp Shopian July, 2009
Word of Thanks:
Submission of report of the Commission, in spite of surmounting difficulties presented on all sides, has substantially been materialized. The relentless efforts made by diverse, dissenting, political parties and even some disgruntled sections of the society, left no stone unturned to hamper the working of the Commission, either by persuading the witnesses to abstain from associating with the working of the Commission, or by utilizing social pressure to almost boycott the proceedings before the Commission. Inspite of the practical difficulties on ground, time constraint and the continuous suspension of communication and commutation facilities, 39 witnesses appeared before the Commission to assist in collection of facts for compilation of this report to answer points under reference.
In this task, the cooperation of the Divisional Commissioner, Shri Masood Samoon was commendable and deserves thanks of the Commission. The Inspector General of Police, Kashmir Dr. B. Srinivasan took all pains to ensure safety of the Commission during the commutation and inspection of various spots. The Deputy Commissioner, Shopian Shri Abdul Majid Khanday, with his sincere smile, was a source of inspiration, moral support and help at all times to the Commission. The Commission expresses special gratitude for his assistance, cooperation, courtesy and help during entire period of more than a months stay of the Commission in Shopian. Special thanks are also extended to Superintendent of Police Shri Shahid Mehraj for providing security though, it was entirely because of the bad aim of the stone pelting urchins, that couple of stones hit some vehicles of the Commission and they missed most of the vehicles.
101 Special thanks are due to Dr. Haseeb Mughal, S.P, who assisted the Commission with professional competence, sincerity of purpose, dedication and tireless energy. Dr. Mughal not only assisted the Commission, during investigation but also helped in compilation of the report at all stages. Thanks are also due to Mr. Abdul Majid, Chief Prosecution Officer, who assisted the Commission with his known professional competence, dedication and sincere efforts. His knowledge of law and procedure was of considerable help and facilitated the submission of the report."
Report blames family
The report has recommended interrogation of the deceased Neelofar’s husband Shakeel Ahangar and his friends, suspecting his hand in the “planning and execution” of the May 29 incident.  
From the report: 
Shakeel Ahmad Ahangar was working with his brothers at Welding workshop at Shopian. He eloped with Neelofar Jan in the, 2007 and went outside Shopian-----. After his return to Shopian he started his own business by opening a shop of readymade furniture items near Police Station Shopian after this he separated from his brothers and started a separate kitchen. He was also looking after the education and expenses of his two sisters Roomi Jan and Asiya Jan ------. After few days he was blessed with a male child thereby adding additional load to his family expenses. In Oct, 2008 he purchased an orchard (1-Kanal, 16-Marla) in Nagbal-Dehgam for about 5.30 lacs.
He also owns a Maruti car and maintains a good living standard.
Further it is learnt that he does not carry a good reputation among the society and is being known for his immoral activities. His assets are quite disproportionate to his known source of income, thus requiring in depth investigation to work out the possibility of Shakeel and his friends/associates in the present incident.
Developing contact by the deceased at Nagabal: The examination of witnesses has suggested that Neelofar Jan, Roomi Jan (other sister of Shakeel, who was a frequent visitor to the orchard along with Neelofar) and Asiya Jan were frequently visiting the orchard. 
Shakeel Ahmed Ahanger, not a good character person, known for his ill deeds and have accumulated huge property beyond his known source of income. He has come to know about this relation, which could have led to the planning and execution of this incident. Needs thorough interrogation of Shakeel his friends and associates to find out the truth. (SIC)
"Special thanks are also due to Mr. Mukhtar Ahmad Wani, Secretary, his sound experience in the legal field, his worldly wisdom, and matured suggestions were of immense help and provided support to the Commission at all times.
Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shopian Shri Mohammad Yousuf Zargar took care of the entire staff of the Commission and ensured the safe stay in spite of continuous closure of the market and other essential supplies including stationery. The Commission adequately thanks Mr. Zargar. Although Executive Engineer, PHE Department did nothing initially to prevent supply of raw water, used by the staff of Commission for drinking and consequently most of the staff members went down with dysentery and diarrhea, but it was only after intervention of the Hon’ble Minister, PHE that clean potable water was provided for drinking of the staff of the Commission.
The Executive Engineer, PHE needs to be made aware of his duty to wake up to the sensitivity, in which the Commission was to function. The Commission thanks the staff of the Circuit House, Shopian and all other agencies for their sincere efforts to help the Commission in executing the task in difficult and tense atmosphere.
The Secretary of the Commission will separately convey the appreciation of the Commission, expressed above, to all concerned, after the report is submitted.
Justice Muzaffar Jan (Retd.)
One Man Commission of Inquiry Camp Shopian, July, 2009
Negligence of Investigating Agency:
When the dead body of Neelofar was recovered, police was present on spot, yet no direction was given to the public, who had gathered on spot, not to touch the dead body and not to approach the place where the dead body was lying, and not to cover the dead body with any cloth. Without taking essential precautions, dead body was shifted to hospital for post mortem examination.
The dead body of Asiya was found resting on two boulders. In this case also, no steps were taken to ensure that evidence, which might have been available around the place of the dead body is not disturbed. The photographs of the dead bodies were not taken at the exact spot, from where the dead bodies were recovered, in the same clothes in which the dead bodies were found.
The dead body of Asiya was pulled out of the river and covered with a blanket and dead body of Neelofar was wrapped in a pheran and then photographs were taken on the shore.
The injuries, which were visible to naked eye on visual inspection of the two dead bodies, were not recorded. The site plan was not prepared meticulously taking care, that all the vital details are shown in the site plan. There is an approach motorable road existing at both the places from where the dead bodies were recovered, but in both the site plans, the approach roads have not been shown. The questionnaire, which is essential to be prepared for the doctors to answer, who performed the autopsy, was not prepared for either of the two dead bodies. No mention in the injury report or in the questionnaire to the doctors is made of the weapon which could have caused the injury on the head of the Asiya.
The depth of river has not been measured, to verify whether the river was deep enough to drown either of the two girls. Investigating agency has not ascertained from either team of the doctors, conducting the post mortem of the two dead bodies, whether all the samples, required by Forensic Science experts, have been taken from both the dead bodies, before the burial of the dead bodies. The certificate regarding presence of spermatozoa was prepared and duly signed by Scientific Officer of Forensic Science Laboratory on Ist June, 2009. The dispatch of certificate was delayed by five days and meanwhile no reminder seems to have been sent to Forensic Science Laboratory. Doctors conducting autopsy, did not send the samples of heart and brain of both the dead bodies, for Forensic Science Laboratory analysis.  The District Magistrate, Mohammad Ramzan Thokar admits that if FIR could have been filed on 30th May, 2009 and investigation started in the right direction, there would have been no law and order problem in the district. It is also admitted by the District Magistrate, that although he informed the S.P Javed Iqbal Mattoo to register an FIR, but he refused to do so. The fall out of initial defective investigation, subsequent delay in filing an FIR, and the immature handling of the high tempers of public, and their emotional outburst, engulfed the entire valley observing hartals for eight days, in which two lives were lost.
In the town of Shopian, the offices, schools, colleges, business establishments, civil amenities even hospitals are closed since last 29 days. The image of the police department has been adversely affected by the incident. The anger and hatred, generated by dissenting political parties, has completely alienated the public from the administration.
The collective resentment, anger and un‐controlled violence, could have been avoided if sufficient preventive measures had been taken by the police, the team of doctors, one Scientific Officer of Forensic Science Laboratory and the District Magistrate of Shopian.
Legal aspects of investigation:
On the analysis of above admitted facts, it appears that the investigating agency, ie., S.I, SHO, Dy.S.P and S.P are unaware of the mandatory provisions of Section 174 CRPC, Rule 580 of Police Manual, Rule 614 of Police Rules & 157(b) CRPC. To appreciate the involvement of the officers of investigating agency, the perusal of relevant rules and procedural requirements will make the position clear. The provisions pertaining to investigation as envisaged in Police Rules, are reproduced hereunder;
1) “Rule 580 of J&K Police Rules‐Dispatch of officer to the spot”:
When a report of a cognizable case is recorded and it is decided not to dispense with investigation under section 157(1)(b) Criminal Procedure Code, a Police Officer shall proceed to the scene immediately. The officer who first proceeds to the spot shall, if he be not competent to complete the investigation, take all possible steps to preserve the scene of the crime from disturbance to record particulars of and secure the presence of potential witnesses, obtain information relating to the case and arrest the culprit. 
2) “Rule 615 of J&K Police Rules‐Investigation Officer’s action at scene of death”:
On arrival at the place where the body of deceased person is lying, the Police Officer making the investigation shall act as follows:‐
1. He shall prevent the destruction of evidence as to the cause of death; 
2. He shall prevent crowding round the body and the obliteration of footsteps;
3. He shall prevent unnecessary access to the body until the investigation is concluded;
4. He shall cover up footprints with suitable vessels so long as may be necessary; 
5. He shall draw a correct plan of the scene of death including all features necessary to a right understanding of the case;
6. If no surgeon or other officer arrives, he shall together with the persons conducting the investigation, carefully examine the body and note all abnormal appearances;
7. He shall remove, mark with a seal, and seal up the clothing not adhering to or required, as a covering for the body; all ornaments and anything which may have caused or been concerned in the death of the deceased and shall make an inventory thereof.
In the inventory there shall be described the position in which each thing and any blood stain, mark rent, injury or other noticeable fact in connection with such thing.
3) “Rule 617 of J&K Police Rules‐The inquest report”:
(1) When the investigation has been completed the investigating officer shall draw up a report in Form 152 A,B or C accordingly as the deceased appears to have died;
A. From natural causes.
B. By violence
C. By poisoning
(2) Such report shall state the apparent cause of death, give a description of any mark or marks of violence which may be found on the body and describe the manner in which and the weapon or instruments with which such marks appear to have been inflicted.
(3) The report shall be signed by the Police Officer conducting investigation and by so many of the persons assisting in the investigation as concur therein and shall be forwarded without delay through the Superintendent to the territorial magistrate.
The following documents shall form part of such report:‐
(a) The plan of the scene of death;
(b) The inventory of clothing etc;
(c) A list of articles on and with the body, if the body, is sent for medical examination;
(d) A list of articles sent for medical examination, if any.
In cases of death by hanging the report shall give particulars as to the height and sufficiency of the support and the nature of the thing used to bear the weight of the body.
In drowning cases the depth of the water shall be stated.
From plain reading of the rule, it is laid that on completion of the investigation, the report must state the details of description of marks of violence or injury and the weapon used to cause the injury. The report must be immediately forwarded to Superintendent alongwith site plan of the scene, inventory of clothes, list of articles sent for medical examination. In case of drowning, the depth of the water must be stated.
4) “Rule 614 of J&K Police Rules‐Investigation under section 174, Criminal Procedure Code:”
The above rules categorically provides that the inquest proceedings must be conducted on spot, and all measures must be taken to prevent destruction of evidence as elaborated above. It is also provided that after the report is prepared, the same has to be handed over to doctor alongwith the dead body for conducting post mortem examination.
5) Rule 580 of Police Manual is as under;
“When a report of cognizable case is recorded and it is decided not to dispense with the investigation under section 157 (1) (b) CrPC, a police officer shall proceed to the scene immediately. The officer who first proceeds to the spot shall, if he be not competent to complete the investigation, take all possible steps to preserve the scene of the crime from disturbance to record particulars of and secure the presence of potential witnesses, obtain information relating to the case and arrest the culprit”.
The rule specifically provides that all steps must be taken to preserve scene of crime from disturbance.
Section 157 (B) of CRPC gives wide powers to an officer incharge P/S to refrain from investigating in un‐important cases, but it mandates every officer incharge of Police Station, on receiving information of commission of offence, to evaluate the intrinsic importance of the alleged offence, sensitivity of allegations and the expressed pleas of the complainant, even if the complaint may initially appear to be trivial, but may if investigated with professional competence, dedication and impartiality lead to collection of valuable and relevant material to commission of a heinous crime and justification of registration of FIR, resulting in conviction of the accused. This discretion is bound to prove fruitful at a later stage for future preventive crime. 
Rule 579 of police manual provides “ in practice it is seldom advisable for any officer of the Police station to avail himself of the powers to refuse investigations, which power the law gives him” but Rule 579 clearly lays down that the officer incharge police station may refuse to investigate a case, but must avoid refusal to investigate and preferably exercise the powers given under the Act to proceed to investigate the case.
Admissions of Officers of Investigating Agency:
All the witnesses i.e. S.I. Gazi Abdul Kareem, SHO Shafeeq Ahmed, Dy. S.P. Rohit Baskotra and S.P Javed Iqbal Mattoo have admitted that the dead bodies were removed from the spot, where they were found before taking the photographs, and the possible evidence, that might have been present in the Rambi Ara Nallah was lost.
It is also admitted by S.I. Gazi Abdul Kareem, SHO Shafeeq Ahmed, Dy. S.P. Rohit Baskotra and S.P Javed Iqbal Mattoo that the place where the dead bodies were found lying was not cordoned off to preserve the evidence, which would have been available on spot.
SHO Shafeeq Ahmed, Dy. S.P. Rohit Baskotra and S.P Javed Iqbal Mattoo have also admitted that they have not examined the dead bodies of either Neelofar or Asiya personally to examine the injuries, which were apparent on the bodies and could have been recorded at the earliest.
The S.I. Gazi Abdul Kareem, S.P Javed Iqbal Mattoo and DIG Rajesh Kumar have admitted that they have not sent any reminder in writing or made any effort to follow up, and ensured the speeding up of the opinion of Forensic Science Laboratory in order to prevent delay and speed up the investigation.
The S.I. Gazi Abdul Kareem and SHO Shafeeq Ahmed have admitted that the details and nature of injuries and the weapon used to inflict the injuries have not been written in the injury memo and no questionnaire has been sent to the team of doctors, who performed the post mortem.
Remedial Measures:
In the facts and circumstances as discussed above, the Commission recommends as under;
1. In the investigation of sensitive cases, the investigation should be entrusted to competent officers of established integrity and impartiality to gain the trust and confidence of the citizens. The officers at all levels should be sensitized to the idea of accountability to the people.
2. Strict monitoring must be maintained to prevent corruption, brutality and failure to register cognizable offence of serious nature by the police.
3. Police, public relations must be developed by imparting qualities of impartiality, integrity and cordial behaviour in the police stations.
4. The Government must take a decision regarding recommendations made by the Commissions within two months of the receipt of the report, and publish the same for information of the public. This exercise will generate trust and faith of the people in the system and also will reflect transparency of the Government.
5. The political patronage in posting of officers at sensitive places may not be encouraged in order to safeguard the operation of the Criminal Justice System independently and impartially.
6. Special Investigation Cell in the Police Department may be created, at State level to monitor the progress of investigation of rape cases and other cases involving public sensitivity and involvement.
7. All the complaints against police agency should be examined by their superior officers and disposed of immediately without delay.
8. Serious complaints against police of following nature should be enquired by Judicial Officer, not below the rank of a Session Judge.
a) Alleged rape of women in police custody;
b) Death or grievous hurt caused while in police custody;
c) Death of two or more persons resulting from police firing in the dispersal of unlawful assemblies.
9. Directions must be given to the superior officers for cordial behaviour with the subordinate officers, because the psyche in which police persons at lower level behaved towards public, is largely conditioned by the manner in which they are themselves treated by their superior officers.
10. The S.P, DIG and IG should be required to undergo short term specialized course in investigation of crime by scientific methods to enable them to have an effective superintendence and control on their subordinates.
11. A capsule crash course may be conducted, requiring all the police officers to have the basic knowledge of the methods of
identification, preservation and collection of evidence by modern scientific methods during investigation.
12. All the officers above the rank of SI must be fully trained with the latest scientific methods of collection of evidence like finger prints, foot marks and identification of foreign material around the place of occurrence.
13. All investigating officers, who are not law graduate must be required to acquaint themselves thoroughly with the basic requirements of the relevant chapters of CRPC, Police laws, Police Manual, circulars  and standing orders issued by the Department from time to time to update their knowledge of investigation. Before posting the investigating officers in an important police station, a preliminary assessment may be made to gauge the legal knowledge of the officer.
14. Raw hands, with no experience of dealing with crime, should never be entrusted with investigation of any serious crime.
15. The ADGP may issue guidelines monthly or fortnightly to investigating agency through zonal officers, emphasizing the directions given by the Hon’ble High Court and Hon’ble Supreme Court in criminal cases regarding the investigation.
16. The investigation of crime must be initiated and completed with the ultimate aim to secure conviction in the court, which serves as a deterrent resulting in curtailment of crime.
17. To ensure compliance with these recommendations, a separate entry may be recorded in the APRs of all investigating officers to indicate the rate of convictions resulting out of their investigation. 
18. Officers from other establishments and Battalions, not having adequate knowledge, experience and training of investigation should
not be posted as head of the investigating agency in a district.
19. Officers with no experience or inadequate experience in dealing with law and order situation, should not be given independent charge of a district with sensitive background.
20. An Accountability Cell may be created under which the DIGs would be responsible to ensure strict supervision of their subordinate staff in the range. Similarly, S.P must be made accountable for the working of the officers subordinate to him in the district.
Delinquency of Doctors:
After the recovery of two dead bodies from river Rambi Ara in the morning of 30th May, 2009. The dead bodies were sent for post mortem to the District Hospital, Shopian. The first team of doctors, who conducted the post mortem was of Dr. Bilal, Dr. Nazia and Dr. Bilques. It seems that on the demand of the relations of the deceased ladies and the public in general, a second team of doctors, consisting of Dr. Mohammad Maqbool, Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Ghulam Qadir Sofi and Dr. Nighat were deputed to conduct post mortem. During the course of inquiry, it has been found that the skull of dead bodies of Neelofar and that of Asiya were not opened and the samples of brain and heart were not taken from both the dead bodies for analysis by the Forensic Science Laboratory. Dr. Nighat, member of the second team of doctors who conducted the autopsy, has submitted representation in writing stating therein that she was informed in the morning of 30th May, 2009 verbally by Medical Superintendent to accompany CMO Pulwama and Deputy CMO, Pulwama to conduct Gynaecological examination of two dead bodies only to ascertain whether any sexual assault has been committed.
From the scrutiny of the statements of doctor witnesses, it appears that first team as well as the second team of doctors who conducted the post mortem examination have not taken the complete samples as per professional requirement to ascertain actual cause of death.
Remedial Measures for Doctors:
With a view to ensure that in future the post mortem examination of all dead bodies are conducted in a professional, fool‐proof and approved manner, the Government may consider to identify a set number of doctors in each district, who are fully qualified, competent and possessed of adequate past experience to conduct post mortem examinations. Guidelines may also be provided requiring the doctors to:
1. Mortuary well equipped with sophisticated tools required for collection and preservation of samples from victims/dead bodies be established at all District Hospitals.
2. A Check list board displaying the list of samples to be taken, test/examination to be carried out and preservation procedures be
displayed in all the Mortuaries in every District Hospital so that  No point/test is missed by the doctors during the examination.
3. It should be mandatory for the medical team to collect all the samples during post mortem in duplicate and in sufficient quantity, as same can to utilized for various types of forensic laboratory tests/examinations. This will avoid the unnecessary exhumation of a dead body.
4. Prepare an Exhaustive list of the items/samples that are required to be taken from the dead body in advance for reference;
5. Prepare an advance check list of changes to be observed on visual examination of the dead body, for ready reference;
6. Anything observed on visual examination must be immediately recorded while performing the post mortem examination, recording must not be deferred till completion of the post mortem.
7. The samples must be properly stored, sealed and labelled for identification in presence of a Magistrate/witness as per requirement of
8. Use of plastic jars, plastic bottles for collecting and preserving the vital samples be avoided at all costs, as it can cause chemical changes on long storage and can be tempered by the interested parties.
9. Videography and still photography of the whole procedure of Post Mortem be made mandatory for the District Hospitals as their proper record can help doctors as well as investigating agency in subsequent investigation, in case any point requires clarification and re‐examination. This can be cited as an evidence also before the Hon’ble Courts in support of the investigation.
10. There is a need to create a post of Forensic Medicine Expert in every District Hospital for carrying out exhaustive medical examination of all rape, murder, suspicious deaths and other heinous crimes. In the absence of an expert, the senior most and experienced doctor be nominated to conduct examination of such victims/dead bodies.
11. It should be mandatory for the Medical team posted in the district to rush to the spot along with the investigating agency to examine the dead body on spot, especially in cases of death under suspicious/unnatural circumstances, as transportation and post mortem handling can add many injuries and other changes in the dead bodies. Examination of such cases be designated as “Priority job” for District Hospital.
12. In all such cases, presence of a magistrate and civil witnesses should be made mandatory while collecting and persevering/sealing samples and while performing such examinations/post mortem.
Remedial Measures regarding District Magistrate:
Rule 24 and 25 of J&K Police Manual are reproduced for reference as under;
Relation between Police and Magistrate: Rule 24. The District Magistrate:
The District Magistrate is the head of the criminal administration of the district, and the police force is the instrument provided by the Government to enable him to enforce his authority and fulfil his responsibility for the maintenance of law and order. The police force in a district is, therefore, placed by law under the general control and direction of the District Magistrate who is responsible that it carried out its duties in such a manner that effective protection is afforded to the public against lawlessness and disorder. In the exercise of his control the District Magistrate is required to inspect police station. He shall exercise no executive authority in matters, which concern solely the internal administration and training of the force, or in questions of discipline as between police officers and their departmental superiors, but his general control extends to all other matters. In all that affects the relations between the police and the public or the keeping of the public peace, the District Magistrate must be consulted and his orders complied with. 
He may (a) require the Superintendent to furnish him with any documents relating to the conduct of any subordinate enrolled police officer in any case in which conduct or character of such police officer is likely to affect his dealings with the public or the prevention and detection of crime; (b) direct the Superintendent to enquire into any allegation of misconduct or neglect of duty on the part of any subordinate enrolled police officer in any case in which such misconduct or neglect of duty affects, or is likely to affect, such officer’s dealings with the public, or the prevention and detention of crime, and to submit the record to superior police authority; and (c) direct the Superintendent to furnish information on any matter connected with crime, the criminal cases, the prevention of disorder or the distribution of the police force, or any other matter not connected solely with the internal administration of the force. 
In exercising his powers of control, the District Magistrate should avoid doing anything to weaken the authority of the Superintendent. All communications between the District Magistrate and the police shall, whenever possible, be conveyed through, and all instructions and orders to them shall similarly be issued from the Superintendent.
Rule 25 Duties of Superintendent towards District Magistrate:
The primary duty of the Superintendent of Police is to afford the District Magistrate the utmost possible assistance, both himself and through the police force under his command, in the preservation of the peace and the prevention or detection of crime. He shall keep in close and constant personal touch with the District Magistrate and shall keep him fully and promptly informed both by personal conference and by written reports of all matters relating to crime and public order. While it is his duty to initiate action by the police in such matter, he must keep the District Magistrate informed of all developments in such matters.
The Superintendent of Police shall keep the District Magistrate informed of his movements generally when away from headquarters, and shall conform to his wishes should the District Magistrate, for reasons connected with the law and order situation of the district, require the Superintendent of Police to proceed to any place in the district or to remain at headquarters at any time. 
The District Magistrates must be made aware of the responsibility for administering Criminal Justice System in the district, and their powers to inspect police stations, and report any irregularity to the Superintendent of Police for redressal, as provided under Rule 24 and 25 of J&K Police Manual.
The District Magistrate must also be made aware of their powers under Criminal Procedure Code so that they deal with any law and order problem effectively under law. As a general policy, the Government may consider appointment of senior seasoned and competent officers, with long field experience as District Magistrates of sensitive district. 
Recommendation against disgruntled constable:
Syed Zeerak Shah, a constable No.(359/T) in Traffic Department at present driver of Gypsy with Dy.SP Farooq Ahmad Zargar, Anantnag Range has in his statement, before the Commission admitted that he slapped Dr. Bilal when Dr. Bilal was on duty conducting post mortem of the dead bodies. 
The constable is said to have been instigating the public and blocking the Highway to voice the protest against the Government. A departmental enquiry may be initiated against the constable, for indulging in political activities, violent protests and professional misconduct, separately. The constable may be placed under suspension, and an FIR for slapping the doctor on duty, under relevant provisions of RPC, may be filed against the constable, to ensure discipline and restrain in the belt force, and to improve the image of the police department.
Press recommendations:-
1. Although we have good number of matured and reasonable journalists representing various leading news papers, but at times unconfirmed and incorrect information is fed to print and electronic media to flare up the sentiments of the public.
2. The print and electronic media gave wide publicity to the last mobile call of Neelofar to her husband, alleging that she was
being chased by CRPF persons around 7.00 PM on 29th May, 2009 near Rambi Ara River.
3. Shakeel Ahmad (husband of Neelofar), Syed Zeerak Shah (brother of Neelofar) and Posha (cousin sister of Neelofar) in one
voice have stated in their statement before the Commission, on oath that Neelofar did not have any mobile phone, and never
called, alleging chase by CRPF persons. The investigating team of the Commission, scrutinized 32686 calls and found that
Neelofar did not have a mobile phone on 29-05-2009.
4. It was also reported in the press that Neelofar was pregnant, but on post mortem examination of Dr. Bilal he found
that Neelofar was not pregnant. 
5. The area of orchard in the press was shown in hundreds of kanals, with thousands of fruit trees, but on inspection of the
orchard, the orchard initially a migrant property was found measuring 1 kanal and 16 marlas under khasra No. 158, Khewat
No. 630 is in a dilapidated, neglected condition, full of weeds, wild grass with nearly 35 fruit trees in a bad shape. As the
incorrect reporting directed against the administration, causes law and order problems, it would be expedient if firm guidelines
are enacted and circulated to ensure that, before publication of any news, the authenticity of the news be verified.
6. It was reported in the press that the garments of the dead bodies were torn. During enquiry it was found that the Ferak and
Shalwar of both the dead bodies were not torn as reported in the press.
7. It was reported in the press that Asiya had a “Sindoor marke” on her forehead. During enquiry it was found that there
were a grave injury of 3 inches long and 2 inches wide 1 cm deep on the forehead of Asiya, which was bleeding even at the
time of post mortem. The flow of blood on the forehead was shamefully distorted and projected as mark of “Sindoor”.
8. It was projected in the press that Constable Mohammad Yaseen made number of calls while conducting the search of
death bodies on 29th/ 30th of May 2009. On call analysis of the Mobile No. 9419927653 of Constable Mohammad Yaseen, it was
found that he had made only four calls during the day and no calls were made by the constable from 10.00 P.M on 29th of May
to 6.00 A.M on 30th of May, 2009.
9. It was reported that there were multiple injuries on the dead body of Neelofer, both the team of doctors have given
consistent statement that there were no visible external injuries on the dead body of Neelofar.
10. It was widely publicized in the press that one Jamal-uddin Gujjar has disappeared. During enquiry Jamal-ud-din Gujjar
with real name as Jamal-ud-din Wani (Gujjar) S/o Yaseen Wani R/o Tatapani, Kalakote is a migrant Gujjar and was actually
found living in a tent, at Dehgam along with his family and is employed as Chowkidar on Islamia Darsgah, Dehgam.
11. Although wide publicity was given that the girls have been gang raped, but during the enquiry no evidence of gang rape
was found by the team of medical experts. 
As the incorrect reporting directed against the administration, cause law and order problems, it would be expedient if firm guidelines are made to ensure that, before publication of any news, the authenticity of the news be verified and after proper satisfaction of the genuineness of the news, it must be published in the newspapers. The reference (iv) is answered accordingly.
Possible aspects of incident (rape and murder of Neelofar Jan and Asiya Jan) to be worked out during the further investigation:
It will be pertinent to mention here that the Commission had no powers to raid, search, interrogate and detain for sustained questioning, any suspects or witness, therefore following aspects need to be thoroughly investigated by the Special Investigation Team constituted for the case. 
􀂙 Police/SFs: As per the statement of the true so called eye-witnesses namely Gh. Mohi-ud-din and Ab. Rashid Pampori and the general public out cry against the role of police/security forces in the incident the matter requires in depth investigation, sustained interrogation of the Police/CRPF personnel to arrive at a conclusion. The role of Police/SFs in the incident can not be rulled out at this juncture.
􀂙 Rift/vengeance between Tukru and Bongam family: In April/May,
2007, Neelofar eloped with Shakeel Ahmad Ahangar against the wishes of her family. It will be in place to mention here that Neelofar
Jan belong to a “Peer” family which is treated in the society with the degree of respect and honour for their upper class status, whereas
the Shakeel Ahmad Ahangar belongs to a “Khaar” family which is included in the other Backward classes of the society. This marriage had given birth to a serious hatred of Peer family towards Ahangar family of Bongam Shopian. It is reliably learnt that Zeerak Shah along with his friends had even threatened the Ahangar family of dire consequences if Neelofar is not handed over to her family. After elopement Neelofar and Shakeel remained out of the Shopian and even out of the State for months together. None of the family members of Neelofar used to visit her in-laws. There are only two or three occasions in last three years where his father, mother and two cousins have visited her during this time. The brother of Neelofar, Zeerak Shah has never visited and never spoken to his sister after she eloped from Tukroo. Till the marriage of Neelofar with Shakeel, he was living in a joint family at Bongam Shopian. But after few days even his own brothers asked him to live separately. This is clear indication suggesting the enmity between the two families. The conduct of Zeerak Shah has been highly suspicious and objectionable after the death of Neelofar and Asiya Jan. He physically assaulted Dr Bilal at District Hospital Shopian and threatened him to disclose the opinion immediately. Even he instigated and provoked the crowd in the hospital against the Doctors and Police and civil administration of the District Shopian. After the burial of Neelofar and Asiya, he pitched a tent at Tukroo and gathered his friends, relatives and other villagers, who used to block the road at Tukroo, smashed the window panes of the civil, government vehicles and raised anti- India and pro-freedom slogans to attract the passersby. It will be in place to mention that the Zeerak Shah is serving constable (359/T) in Traffic Department and is presently posted as Driver with Dy SP Traffic Farooq Ahmad Zargar. In the backdrop of these activities it is required that sustained questioning/interrogation of Zeerak Shah his associates and relatives be carried out so as to work out thepossibility of their involvement in rape and murder of Neelofar and Asiya Jan.
􀂙 Conduct of Shakeel A Ahanger? Shakeel Ahmad Ahangar, his character and background: He was working with his brothers at
Welding workshop at Shopian. He eloped with Neelofar Jan in the, 2007 and went outside Shopian-----. After his return to Shopian he
started his own business by opening a shop of readymade furniture items near Police Station Shopian after this he separated from his
brothers and started a separate kitchen. He was also looking after the education and expenses of his two sisters Roomi Jan and Asiya Jan -. After few days he was blessed with a male child thereby adding additional load to his family expenses. In Oct, 2008 he purchased an orchard (1-Kanal, 16-Marla) in Nagbal-Dehgam for about 5.30 lacs. He also owns a Maruti car and maintains a good living standard. 
Further it is learnt that he does not carry a good reputation among the society and is being known for his immoral activities. His assets are quite disproportionate to his known source of income, thus requiring in depth investigation to work out the possibility of Shakeel and his friends/associates in the present incident.
􀂙 Developing contact by the deceased at Nagabal: The examination of witnesses have suggested that Neelofar Jan, Roomi Jan (other
sister of Shakeel, who was a frequent visitors to the orchard along with Neelofar) and Asiya Jan were frequently visiting the orchard.
Spot inspection of the orchard reveals that the orchard is fenced with CGI sheets from three sides and there is no proper gate for entry into the orchard. There are about 35 small and big fruit trees, without any pruning/cutting and ground is full of weeds. The purpose of their regular and frequent visit to the orchard could not be established so far. It is quiet possible that during these frequent visits to the orchard in last six/seven months, they (but more particularly Neelofar Jan) might have developed some relation with other persons. Shakeel Ahmed Ahanger, not a good charactered person, known for his ill deeds and have accumulated huge property beyond his known source of income. He has come to know about this relation which could have led to the planning and execution of this incident. Needs thorough interrogation of Shakeel his friends and associates to find out the truth.
Summary of Call details:
During the Enquiry 33‐cell phones numbers belonging to some important witnesses, police officers and suspects were analyzed in which total number of incoming calls 14168, incoming SMS 4041, out going calls 9825, out going SMS 4552 making in all 32586 were screened.
The aim of the exercise was to establish the direct or indirect link between the victims and the suspects. The exercise was taken up to know the family relations and degree of intimacy of different witnesses with the victims also. Unfortunately the number of the victims could not be traced out so far and even family has shown its resistance to divulge the same before the commission. The cell phone number of victims could have helped the Commission in working out their links and relations with different persons/suspects and could have helped the investigation in a big way. The mystery whether they were carrying cell phone or not remains to be unearthened? The call details of 03‐cell phones are still awaited. 
The analysis has further helped the commission to ascertain that there was no connectivity between Const. Mohammmad Yasin deployed for search with Police station or any other senior officers including SHO, Dy SP Hqrs and SP Shopian of the Police during the intervening night of 29th/30th May 2009. Further more, there was no connectivity between SHO, Dy SP Hqrs and SP during the night of 29/30.05.2009 was also established through the analysis of the Call Detail Record of these officers."
Post a Comment