-including SP Ganderbal Hansraj Parihar, his deputy Bahadur Ram Kaith, and three men of their escort Farooq Ahmad Gudoo, Farooq Ahmad Padroo and Bansi Lal were charged for abduction and killing of Ghulam Nabi Wani.
The army was not cooperating in the case and then CJM Abdur Rashid Malik issued notices to Brigadier of 3 Sector RR Manasbal to produce the accused army personnel in the Court. But they still didn’t appear and the cases were shifted to Srinagar Sessions Judge. In Imam’s case, the court had given the Army 15 days to decide whether they will initiate Court Martial proceedings against the accused Army personnel or face trial in the civilian court but they never turned up. All the trials were then shifted to Srinagar Sessions Judge except Molvi Showkat’s case which was going on in 3rdAdditional Session Judge, Srinagar.
When the Supreme Court stayed its order on Pathribal Fake encounter, all of these cases got automatically stopped as these cases too were involving army. But now the verdict has come in Pathribal case, it is believed these five cases also might get shifted out for Court Martial.
In all these cases, the government forces were not on active duty or they had detained civilians without any reason but then again it depends on the honourable courts how the Judges will interpret the ‘on duty/active duty’. If the government says anybody posted in Kashmir valley would be treated on active duty all the time, it means that anybody posted here would be deemed to be on active duty whether actually he was on active duty or not at the time of the crime he may be found involved in.
“If the Army chief’s case is going on in the civil court then why can’t other army cases be tried in civil criminal courts? Army keeps on saying they have confidence in court marshals, then why it can’t be reversible,” asks Zaffar Shah, a senior advocate.
There are many other cases where federal government forces were involved, like in the case of Zahid Farooq who was killed by BSF personnel, or that of Altaf Ahmed Sood who was killed by CISF in Boniyar in January 2011. All these cases could now be pushed outside the civilian domain.
According to Defense Ministry, in response to an RTI application, 53 cases were registered in army court since 1999 till 18 June 2012 in which seven personnel were given life imprisonment, death sentence was awarded to three and among rest of the case some minor punishments were given and in some of the cases accused was not found guilty.
People in Kashmir rarely believe in military courts. “Everybody there (Military Courts) is in uniform and you feel isolated. You will be called for witness but one feels psychologically threatened in giving statement among uniformed men,” shares a woman, whishing anonymity, whose son’s case was going on in a military court. “I have lost hope of any justice.”
“In court marshals, trail is conducted in some rare cases and if in any case 3 or 4 personnel were involved, they punish only one among the culprits which has ultimately affected the satisfaction with such courts,” says Khurram Pervez, a prominent human rights defender. “And to them civil courts are transparent where trails are open to everybody be it people who are not associated with the case or anybody else.”
Mian Abdul Qayoom says, “Now it will be very difficult to conduct trails in criminal courts for other such cases, involving army”.
“The only way out is amendment in law. In democracy army personnel should feel they are accountable before the civil court which can give some relief but it is not the case with Kashmir,” says Zaffar Shah.
