The Supreme Court on Thursday took serious view of the Centre taking divergent stand on the application of the controversial Armed Forces Special Power Act in the context of two “fake encounters” in Jammu and Kashmir and Assam and asked the government to take a clear view on the issue.
Virtually pulling up the government for taking different stand on AFSPA’s application in the context of the Army’s action against seven youth in Jammu and Kashmir, who were allegedly killed in “fake encounter” on the suspicion of their involvement in Chhittisinghpura massacre, which took place in 2004 just ahead of the then US President Bill Clinton’s visit to India and identical allegation of fake encounter against CRPF personnel in Assam.
The reprimand to the government came from the top court after government’s senior counsel Ashok Bhan flayed the use of AFSPA powers by the Army in Jammu and Kashmir in the context of the “fake encounter” of Chhattisinghpura massacre suspects but justifying the use of the provisions of the tough law to “shield” the CRPF men in Assam.
“You (government) cannot say that an Army man can enter any home and enjoys immunity as it has been done in the discharge of official duties,” a vacation bench of Justices B.S. Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar told Bhan.
Mr Bhan sought prosecution of the personnel of Rashtriya Rifles, who allegedly were involved in the Jammu and Kashmir “fake encounter” of the seven youth, whose bodies were exhumed on the orders of the local court, but he claimed “immunity” to the CRPF personnel on the face of a petition seeking their prosecution.
“How can you (government) adopt diametrically different views” on a vital question of law, the bench asked.
While seeking de-linking of the two cases and deal them separately, Mr Bhan said he was making the submission as part of his “professional” duty assigned to him.
Without giving any hint whether the two cases would be dealt separately or jointly, the apex court said the matter needed a detailed hearing as it involved a “vital question of law” and fixed it for further hearing in July on reopening of the Supreme Court after the ongoing summer vacation.