Firing wholly unjustified: HC

Legal Correspondent
The Staesman, 17 November

KOLKATA, Nov. 16: Delivering judgment in the Nandigram killings case today, Calcutta High Court held that police firing there on 14 March in which 14 people had been killed was wholly unjustified and violative of Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution.

The Division Bench of the Chief Justice, Mr SS Nijjar and Mr Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose which passed the order stated that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into the Nandigram incident will continue and asked the investigating agency to submit a comprehensive report to it within a month.

The court rejected all the arguments of the state government and did not accede to a state government plea to stay the implementation of its judgment.

COMPENSATION PACKAGE

The state government was directed to pay Rs 5 lakh to the kin of each person killed in the indiscriminate police firing, Rs 1 lakh to each injured person and Rs 2 lakh to each of the rape victims who have been duly identified. The compensation, the court directed, should be paid within one month.

The Bench stated that the action of the police on 14 March cannot be justified on the grounds of sovereign immunity. The Advocate-General’s argument claiming immunity for police action on such occasion is not acceptable, the court held.

The police action cannot be justified even under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Police Act, 1861, or the Police Regulations, 1943. It is ultra vires Articles 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, the court further held.
The judgment stated that 14 persons had been killed in the police firing in Nandigram and 162 persons had been injured.

The court also noted the details of rape of women. It directed the state government to pay compensation to all those who suffered in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court.

SUO MOTU NOTICE

The Bench stated that it was justified in taking suo motu notice of the wholly indefensible incident of police firing at Nandigram on 14 March on the basis of newspaper reports and the statement made by the Governor.

The state Advocate-General’s submission that the Governor’s statement cannot be taken into consideration in view of the statement made by the chief minister in the Assembly is not acceptable.

INTERIM DIRECTIONS FLOUTED

The court observed that during the hearing of the Nandigram matters, interim directions had been issued on a number of occasions. It was, however, brought to the notice of the court that the state government had failed miserably to carry out these directions.

Even in cases in which the directions were implemented, it was done in a manner which resulted in little benefit to the people who were sought to be benefited. “We, therefore, direct the state government to implement all the directions issued by this court on 15 March, 2 May and 3 May, 2007.”

CBI INQUIRY

The court stated it had no hesitation in directing the CBI to continue the inquiry. Earlier, on 15 March, the court had directed the CBI to collect all relevant material about the Nandigram incident. The CBI had submitted a report to the High Court on 22 March.

Now, it was held, the CBI is directed to conduct a thorough and detailed investigation and submit a comprehensive report to the court within one month.
The report should clearly set out the crimes that have been committed against any individual. The victims should be identified. The offenders should be identified. The report should state whether any departmental action or criminal proceedings have been initiated against any individuals or officers who have transgressed any provision of law.

The CBI is directed to take necessary steps before appropriate courts of law ~ (including) registration and initiation of criminal proceedings in accordance with law, it was further held. The Advocate-General, Mr Balai Ray, made a prayer that the operation of the judgment be stayed for three weeks. The court refused to accede to the prayer.

After the judgment was delivered, the Advocate-General told reporters that he would advise the state government to prefer an appeal against the judgment to the Supreme Court. The appeal will question whether without the consent of the state government the CBI can inquire into any criminal case. This matter, Mr Ray said, had been referred to a larger Bench of the Supreme Court and was pending before that larger Bench. The state government had filed an affidavit justifying the police firing in Nandigram. The government had then also ordered an administrative inquiry.