Home

Why Subscribe ?

Popularise CC

Join News Letter

Twitter

Face Book

Editor's Picks

Feed Burner

Read CC In Your
Own Language

India Burning

Mumbai Terror

Financial Crisis

Iraq

AfPak War

Peak Oil

Alternative Energy

Climate Change

US Imperialism

US Elections

Palestine

Latin America

Communalism

Gender/Feminism

Dalit

Globalisation

Humanrights

Economy

India-pakistan

Kashmir

Environment

Book Review

Gujarat Pogrom

WSF

Arts/Culture

India Elections

Archives

Links

Submission Policy

About CC

Disclaimer

Fair Use Notice

Contact Us

Search Our Archive

 



Our Site

Web

Subscribe To Our
News Letter

Name: E-mail:

Printer Friendly Version

C.B.I (Concocting Bizarre Interpretations) In Shopian

By Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal

28 May, 2010
Countercurrents.org

JAMMU, April 10: ‘If you can’t convince someone, you confuse them.’
That was American president Harry S. Truman half a century ago. But
right now, this is precisely how the government response to the
Shopian rapes and murders (of May 29, 2009) and the campaign for
justice that followed can be summed up.

From the very beginning the government response, to one of the biggest
controversies ever in the history of Kashmir, has not been marked by
consistency. The official investigating agencies – right from the
Special Investigation Team of the Jammu and Kashmir Police to the
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) have been busier spreading
canards of lies, spinning rumours and using media as a tool to leak
misinformation, rather than clearing the cobwebs.

The CBI report, based on its investigations, is in striking contrast
to the Justice Muzaffar Jan Commission report, which despite its
limitations and flaws, did indict the police personnel for tampering
evidence and deemed it not just dereliction of duty but rather a
deliberate calculated move. The CBI, which has cracked its whip on
everybody – from the doctors to the lawyers active in the campaign for
justice – has been too kind to the police personnel and given them a
clean chit.

And to top up everything, chief justice Barin Ghosh, who had taken up
a pro-active role in unraveling the truth, has finally been shown the
door and sent on a punishment posting for daring to go against the
tide – for having ordered the arrest of police personnel last summer,
monitoring the investigations by the SIT and now failing to
acknowledge the CBI report as the gospel truth.

An impression is being created by the government as if the CBI report
is the last word. Barin Ghosh’s unceremonious exit is not the only
indicator. Chief minister Omar Abdullah, in his mid-summer madness
last June, had done a flip-flop - first talking about ‘drowning
theory’ and then admitting that ‘something has happened’ and that the
two Shopian victims, Asiya Jan and Neelofar, are like his sisters,
ensuring justice for them. After a winter of discontent, and facing
brickbats on human rights front recently on the floor of the state
legislative assembly he decided to finally break his silence as he
endorsed the CBI report.

The CBI report running into hundreds of pages may on the face of it
seem like an impressive document but only a closer scrutiny may reveal
that all that glitters is not gold. It doesn’t take a legal expert to
question the logics of the conclusions the premier investigating
agency of the country has arrived at. Even an elementary school
student with a keen eye can point out glaring flaws.

At best the CBI report is simply a compilation of FIR, statements,
variety of post mortem reports (many of them to create as much
confusion as the CID and SIT initially did), post exhumation
observations and set of conclusions for which no logic, evidence or
explanation is offered. There has been no investigation and no need
has been felt for the same.

A perusal of the entire report shows how the CBI has conveniently
picked out on certain portions and skirted the rest, not even
bothering to investigate the loose ends or the doubts that arise from
the various statements that have been taken and recorded.
Just to quote a few of the inadequacies:

Role of policemen

The five police personnel indicted by Justice Jan Commission, and
later arrested on the directions of the state high court, have been
let off the hook without even questioning why they collected no
evidence from the spot, failed to mishandle the law and order
situation or delayed the lodging of an FIR. They have simply got a
clean chit with a polygraph test, details of which are submitted in
the CBI report, revealing that many questions have not even been
asked, thus putting the effectiveness of the polygraph test in serious
doubt.

SSP Javed Mattoo’ statement before the CBI reflects little on the
facts of the case, investigations or what he did in his capacity when
the incident came to light and Shopian broke out into protests. He
simply talks from a victim’s perspective, talking about rumours and
making political statements about ‘PDP and separatists’ working in
close co-ordination against him and giving a picture as if the entire
anger in Shopian was sparked by this nexus. Mattoo talks about SMSs
being floated by media persons on 30th morning which led to problem.
How does he arrive at this conclusion. What were the SMSs? Who was
sending them? Then he talks about Dr Nighat’s ‘provocative statement’.
He was neither witness to it, he was simply told by someone. He
doesn’t say who? The investigators don’t think these questions are
important enough.

Not only Mattoo’s statement is politically incorrect, it suffers from
factual inaccuracies. When the agitation first began in Shopian, the
separatists or other political leaders were nowhere in the picture.
They only seized the opportunity few days after the anger became
uncontrollable. For two days, the anger spilled out in form of
unorganised protests, the first day of which was marked by a bit of
violence. It was thereafter that the Shopian Bar Association and the
Majlis-e-Mushawarat, both of which comprised of people with different
political leanings – Congress, NC, PDP, separatists or totally
apolitical. The three month long campaign in Shopian was totally
peaceful and the groups spearheading the agitation in this area cannot
be held responsible for violent incidents in distant Srinagar or other
parts of the Valley. The CBI conveniently does not draw any
distinction between the two parallel agitations – by the local people
and the others by separatists, PDP or other fringe groups. But more
importantly, it simply laps up Javed Mattoo’s generalised over-view
without any serious cross questioning about why a police officer of
that ranking has no facts to narrate instead of making a political
comment in his statement.

The police role in the case has been the most dubious of all and one
cannot lose sight of the very significant observation made by the
State High Court – that either they (police officials) are the accused
or they know who has done it (rapes and murders). The observation was
obviously made because there were too many flaws and inadequacies in
the police story. The CBI, instead of questioning them, has merely
endorsed them without even raising an eyebrow.

The most curious is the case of Inspector Gazi Kareem, who was among
one of the accused police officials, arrested for over one and a half
months. Interestingly, Gazi Kareem was not even on duty when the girls
went missing and when the search teams were sent out. As Kareem
himself says in his statement to the CBI, “On 30th (May 30, 2009) at
around 11.00 p.m. I was informed by Head Munshi Riyaz Ahmed that the
investigation of the matter was entrusted to me by the SHO and the
relevant entries were recorded in the DD/ Roznamcha. Initially I
protested on the ground that I was not aware about the matter and was
not part of the investigation but despite my protest, the matter was
entrusted to me and I had to follow the instructions of the then SHO.”
Why has this suspicious story of Gazi Kareem not been cross checked by
anybody? He was not part of the search party but for forced by the SHO
to take up the case. Why did the SHO insist? Doesn’t the CBI think
this is significant?

Medical reports

The most important evidence in the hands of the CBI, as per its own
claims, seems to be the post exhumation medical evidence. But just how
valid and authentic can that be is easily questionable. The CBI
quickly demolishes the previous medical reports, stating that there
were multiple reports available and concludes that the doctors are the
culprits. It is true that several different post mortem reports were
doing rounds in the Valley during the first few months of the
incident. But is there any evidence to blame the doctors. The CID
department itself was found flashing a ‘fake report’ and claiming it
was authentic till it was asked for a copy. So why is there no
investigation? Obviously those who bungled the medical reports and
samples had a motive. If the doctors indeed are the culprits, there
should be enough evidence and investigations to subscribe a motive.
The doctors, in all probability, did not know the victims. They
couldn’t have schemed up everything on behalf of the ‘separatists’,
days before the incident even caught the attention of the latter.
Perhaps, it may have been more worthwhile to probe why the Director
Health Services and the Director General Police (as revealed by the
hordes of statements in CBI’s report) were taking such exceptional
interest in the post mortem reports, the forensic samples, ensuring
that doctors accompanied the samples to FSL Srinagar and thereafter
monitored everything till the reports were made public. Surely, in a
state where medical legal cases happen by dozens on a daily basis,
this might not be the normal course of action. Perhaps, this has
escaped the CBI’s eye.

Quite conveniently, the credibility and image of the doctors,
especially Dr Nighat – who has all along maintained that the two women
were raped - was first tarnished, through media, and then the bodies
were exhumed to make the post exhumation medical observances sound
more authentic. Medical and forensic experts have pointed out that
three months after bodies are buried, there is no chance of viewing
‘hymen’ or injury marks on the skin, which disintegrate. These bodies
were exhumed four months after they were buried but the AIIMS team
brought by the CBI miraculously found the hymen and no injuries. This
is in striking contrast to Dr Nighat’s observations to Justice Jan
Commission of Inquiry and the Independent Women’s Initiative for
Justice, of which this author was a member. She has elaborately talked
of a broken hymen, signs of sexual assault and injuries on the thighs.
What Dr Nighat said to CBI has not been recorded in its report. It has
merely been splashed in the media. Therefore, one does not know the
authenticity of these versions that have appeared in the media with an
obvious aim to tarnish the image of doctors and some Shopian activists
rather than proving something scientifically.

So there are two very different sets of observations – one within a
day of the death of the two girls and the other made four months
later. Medically, it may be difficult to find the latter more reliant.

Drowning theory

So how does all this prove that drowning indeed took place? All that
the CBI report has been able to prove is that the flow of water in
Rambiara nallah, where the two bodies were found, was faster on that
particular day. There is no evidence of a depth fit enough for
drowning. How come two women drowned there, just after 7.00 p.m. when
it is still not dark at a time when an incident of drowning can easily
be noticeable. After all, they must have struggled, shouted, screamed
enough to be heard in a well inhabited and a fully militarised area,
if that indeed was the case. The nallah itself is ankle deep at the
spots were the two bodies were found. It may be knee deep at some
places. If it was a natural case of drowning, the bodies should have
been fully wet when they were found. The eye-witnesses have pointed
out very clearly in their statements to the CBI that “only the right
side of Neelofar’s body was wet.” Why has the CBI ignored such basic
circumstantial evidence, which becomes more important in cases where
concrete evidence cannot be produced.

Interpretations, not investigations

These are just some of the many samples that make the entire CBI
exercise and its conclusions totally unrealistic and unpalatable.
Obviously, they have not even bothered to go through their own
statements or conveniently ignored them, hoping that nobody would
notice. It has simply taken the easy road of nailing those who dared
to raise their voice and swam against the stream. The response clearly
matches the stand of the governments, both in the state and at the
centre, who have cleverly connived to bid adieu to Justice Barin
Ghosh, the only person who had inspired hope and faith of the
Kashmiris in the Indian system of justice.

The reasons are a bit obvious and a bit mired in mystery. There is a
definite cover-up to shield the men in uniform and in pursuance of
that a bid to go to any extent, even negating the apolitical and
peaceful nature of the campaign, trampling people’s faith, whatever
little of it was left, in Indian democracy and its system of justice.
But then why a political flip flop?

All three investigations – by Justice Muzaffar Jan Commission and CBI,
which were in striking contrast with each other and the SIT, which did
nothing, had the blessings of the government. Then why different
lines? A part of the answer probably lies in the probability that no
one in the official circles had pre-empted a well organised, peaceful,
campaign, well within a legal framework. They were unnerved. It wasn’t
easy to cover up without logics. It had to be done by falsifying
whatever circumstantial evidence was available or through a perpetual
of Goebbels truth. So, was Omar being bailed out temporarily for his
initial ‘drowning faux pas’, which may as well have been an intended
one, with the Jan Commission report? The CBI came into picture later,
when it became a bit easier for the government to handle the scene and
begin reversing the story. The Jan Commission report was demolished
bit by bit – using mostly media and then a bit of paper work. But
sorry, no investigations, no cross checking; no evidences either. Is
that how the premier investigating agency of the country works?
Whatever be the reasons for this rigidity in shielding the guilty in
Shopian case, truth and justice have become the ultimate casualty, the
repercussions of which will not simply be felt by the family members
of Asiya and Neelofar, or entire Shopian. They could be dangerously
long term, impacting a greater political-social landscape of the
region.