Chattergam killings added to the long list of army’s “mistaken identity” cases in valley. With army promising swift action in the case, Safwat Zargar highlights the facts and fate of many such cases piling up in the face of impunity-jacketed troops stationed in valley  

Army during an encounter in South Kashmir. Pic: Bilal Bahadur
Army during an encounter in South Kashmir.
Pic: Bilal Bahadur

It was déjà vu for many after army fired 118 bullets at a Maruti car on November 3 at Chattergam (in Budgam), killing two and leaving other two critically injured. One survived the deadly assault only to hear the ‘incredible’ army story behind killing and wounding his friends: “It is a case of mistaken identity.”

While briefing the press, army’s top brass used the clichéd phrase—“mistaken identity” to describe the “trigger-happy” behaviour of his “jawans”. After cliché army offered ‘blood money,’ euphemistically “compensation” apparently to ‘ebb out’ some woes they inflicted upon the mourning families. But the offer backfired.

Mohammad Yusuf Bhat, father of slain teen Faisal, 14, in-turn offered army: “I offer Rs 20 lakh per head for those who killed my innocent and unarmed son.” The offer followed by a question: “Is Army ready to handover them to me?” After question came resolve: “I won’t take a penny from the killers of my son.”

Bhat wants justice. So do the families whose kith and kin figure in army’s “mistaken identity” list. Previous records of human rights abuse cases in Kashmir disappoint, when it comes to the prosecution of “involved” armed forces.  This time, a growing realisation in valley towards army’s code of conduct is: the end result of this case is destined to disappoint Kashmiris, like mostly in past ones did.

But that doesn’t acquit army from misconduct. Rough estimates reveal, since 2005, 23 killings (including four army men) have been termed cases of “mistaken identity.” However, when it comes to the prosecution and punishment meted out to erring army men, justice appears far-fetching.

“This is not an isolated event,” says Parvez Imroz, senior Srinagar-based human rights lawyer. “Indian army is conscious of the fact that they can do anything as a result of the draconian Armed Forces Special Powers Act [AFSPA]. They are emboldened by the legal impunity guaranteed under the act.”

Under the provisions of AFSPA, the legal impunity doesn’t stop an investigating agency from probing the case, informs Imroz. However, in most of the cases where army is involved, police is “helpless,” citing army’s “non-cooperation” an impediment in investigation. But in their report, police can mention “non-cooperation” of army.

Back to Chattergam killings, army men fired at the car in which boys were travelling with an “intention to kill”, reveals police FIR in the case. The charges of murder and attempt to murder under section 302 and 307 respectively have been slapped against the army. Standing in the line of fire, army has called for an inquiry. (Even though a case of murder has been registered against the army, no army personnel have been questioned by police.)

When the news of army’s ‘trigger-happy’ event reached New Delhi, the ‘concerned’ minister holding defence portfolio (Arun Jaitley) took to twitter and promised action against the guilty. “The Budgam incident in the Kashmir Valley is highly regrettable,” Jaitley tweeted.

Funeral of two Faisal and Mehraj-ud-din killed in army firing at Chattergam Budgam.
Funeral of two Faisal and Mehraj-ud-din killed in army firing at Chattergam Budgam.

“A fair inquiry will be held and action taken against those found guilty.”

By November 7, northern command chief Lt Gen D S Hooda in a press conference vowed to complete the inquiry within days and not months. “Hopefully,” he assured, “if all goes well and all the witnesses come in, we will have completed the inquiry in the next 10 days.”

“Nobody knows what happens in these internal inquiries conducted by the army,” continues Imroz. “Inquiries are mostly ordered to subside the public anger.”

Basim Ahmad Bhat, the fifth boy who miraculously managed to escape unhurt from the car in which Faisal and Mehraj-ud-Bhat were killed and two others injured, refuted army’s claim that car hadn’t stopped at two checkpoints. “When the army personnel fired at the car there was no checkpoint on the road,” he says.

Now when the case has been tagged as “mistaken identity,” an instinctual attention falls on many such cases, still awaiting justice.

In the fall of 2010, one Manzoor Ahmad Pathwal (32) of Bandipora fell to 14-RR army regiment’s bullets in the jungles of Kudar during the night. When the killing surfaced, army justified its ‘trigger-happy’ action, saying: “Soldiers fired at Pathwal when he ran away on being challenged to stop.” No prizes for guessing. Soon a stamp of “mistaken identity” fell on the case.

A few months after, it was first week of February 2011. Army stationed in Chogal Handwara barged into the house of a 21-year-old labourer (Manzoor Ahmad Magray) in the locality. The wailing family later claimed that their son was shot dead in cold-blood after being picked up from his house. Finally when army issued its handout, Magray had become a “victim of mistaken identity”.

“What is a mistaken identity?” Imroz asks. “This is a brazen violation of the human rights charter of United Nations.”

As per the United Nations code of operations, an armed man has to use force only in defence. But in Kashmir, Imroz claims, “the use of force by Indian army soldiers is disproportionate with complete impunity.”

But mistakes can happen, asserts Mohammad Junaid, a South Kashmir scholar pursuing doctorate in US, but when mistakes recur in a systematic manner, “it means there is a problem in the arrangement of system.” He argues, the presence of more than half a million troops in Kashmir manifests constant threat to civilians: “In Kashmir, army soldiers are acting like traffic cops and they seem to be judges of who should be shot or not.”

“The sheer scale of violence perpetrated on the young men due to the crime of car having skidded and hit the tree close to a military post,” says Prof Dibyesh Anand, “illustrates the fact that Indian military has no concept of proportionality.”

Prof Anand who is heading department of Politics and International Relations at London’s Westminster University says “coercive forces” in Kashmir use violence on people without care because there is no “accountability due to AFSPA” and because the Indian media and government go out of way to justify and back their actions. “This culture of impunity,” he believes, “explains the regularity of such incidents in Kashmir.”

By bringing morale of army and nationalism in the discourse of justice is bound to have long-term repercussions for India, Imroz believes.  “When the established state institutions have failed, International community has a responsibility.”

Under AFSPA, the state government has to get a sanction from federal government to prosecute a member of security forces in a civilian court. The fact that Indian federal government hasn’t given a sanction to prosecute a member of armed forces in a civilian court, claims Imroz, makes it clear that it is ready to compromise delivery of justice to civilians.

If the army is like any accountable institution, asserts Junaid, “then why is it not willing to prosecute the erring soldiers in a civilian court?” Indian government thinks if the soldiers are tried in a civilian court, it might demoralize the army, he says, “but what about civilians?”

In the spring of 2010, Habibullah Khan (70-year-old) beggar was killed by 6-RR in “an encounter” in North Kashmir’s Rainwari forests. Soon after the killing, army claimed to have gunned down the oldest militant commander active in Kashmir. When the spin backfired, army (apparently in a face-saving measure) termed the case as “mistaken identity”.

“What incidents like these do is that they expose Indian democracy as flawed and oppressive for the people in the valley,” says Prof Anand, “take away hope for justice, and normalise violence in the wider society.”

Interestingly, days after UK-born J&K chief minister Omar Abdullah was sworn in, a 40-year-old deaf and dumb, Abdul Rashid Reshi of Veer Saran Pahalgam, was mistaken as “intruder” and killed at the main gate of the Commander 31 Sub Area’s residence on Gupkar Road. At the fag end of Omar’s rule, another case of “mistaken identity” has cropped up.

While nature loves symmetry, it equally believes in justice system. But Kashmir’s tragedy apparently lies in tags. And therefore, “mistaken identity” keeps cropping up.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here