[Reader-list] 'Encounter' at Batla House: Unanswered Questions

[Shuddhabrata Sengupta]

Dear all,

This list has had discussion on the so called 'encounter' at Batla  
House, in the vicinity of Jamia Nagar in New Delhi in the past year.  
Here is a synopsis and a few details of the recently released  
'report' by the Jamia Teachers Solidarity Group about this incident.  
I hope that readers on this list will find this of interest.

regards,

Shuddha

-------------

'Encounter' at Batla House: Unanswered Questions

A Report by Jamia Teachers' Solidarity group

60 pp., Rs 35, February 2009.

For Copies contact: Adil Mehdi (9990923027)  indianlit at yahoo.com /  
Ahmed Sohaib (9899462042) sohaibnirvan at gmail.com / Ghazi Shahnawaz  
(9868221506) mgshahnawaz at gmail.com

Synopsis:

This report is based on police statements, press reports, testimonies  
of families and friends of the accused and other documentary  
evidence. It highlights the numerous contradictions in the police  
version(s) about the 'encounter' and the accusations.

Some of the questions raised are:

1)      Did the police have prior information about the presence of  
dreaded 'terrorists' in L-18 when they raided the flat? So far,  
conflicting versions have been provided by the police. In one  
version, they claim ignorance of such confirmed information, pleading  
that they went in only for a routine recee and were ambushed (then  
how did the Police Commissioner within hours declare Atif and Sajid  
to be the mastermind behind all blasts since 2005, when Sajid would  
have been 14-years-old); and in another, they claim to have put Atif  
under surveillance since 26th July 2008 (so how did these boys manage  
to plant bombs all over the city right under the Delhi Police's nose?)

2)      Were the Police men wearing Bullet proof vests (BPV) or not?  
In some statements, the Delhi Police said that they avoided wearing  
the BPVs in order not to alert the 'terrorists'; in yet other  
statement they claim that their officer escaped all injury while  
firing upon an armed Sajid because he was wearing a BPV.

3)      What explains the injury marks on the bodies of the deceased  
boys? Atif's back was sloughed off and Sajid had bullet wounds on his  
head as though bullets had been pumped into his head while he was  
made to kneel―all of which raises doubts about the genuineness of  
the 'shootout'.

4)      The Police claim that Sajid was an expert bomb maker who used  
quartz clocks, detonators, ammonium nitrate, yet none of the  
'recoveries' which even the police have purportedly made, comprise  
any of the above material that could be used for making Sajid's  
'signature' bombs. So what made Dadwal and his force conclude that  
Sajid was the one behind the blasts in Delhi and elsewhere?

5)      Why is there such rigid resistance to any independent probe  
on the part of the government and the Delhi Police? So much so that  
the Lieutenant Governor has even rejected a magisterial enquiry,  
which is mandatory as per NHRC guidelines on encounter killings.

6)      Why are post-mortem reports of all the three killed not being  
made public? Is there something to hide?


The report also carries brief profiles of the accused in the case,  
including the two students killed. The fact that most of them were  
students enrolled in educational institutions, whether Jamia or  
elsewhere, or working gives the impression that they were regular  
young men in search of better opportunities in life. None of their  
actions puts them under suspicion: they enrolled as students, bought  
sim cards in their name, signed a rent lease deed, duly verified by  
the police (copy in report), provided genuine address details etc.  
Moreover, the day after the blasts in Delhi, there were several  
arrests and detentions in the Jamia Nagar area, which was common  
knowledge. It is highly unlikely that actual terrorists would make no  
attempt to move away from a neighbourhood which was obviously under  
the police scanner to a safer hideout.


Testimonies of eyewitnesses at the Jan Sunwai (12 Oct 2008, Batla  
House) have also been included in the report. Neighbours testified  
that they found nothing strange or suspicious about the boys and  
resented the fact that no senior local resident was taken into  
confidence or to crosscheck any information about suspected  
terrorists. The manner in which the police operated raised suspicions  
about their real motives. Further, they also said that while the  
operation was on, the policemen could be seen throwing pots etc on to  
the 4th floor flat of L-18, and that they heard gun shots of only one  
kind. This naturally raises the misgiving that the police was trying  
to create an impression of cross fire and struggle, where none existed.


'Encounter' at Batla House also highlights the contradictions in the  
'mastermind' theories developed by various state police departments.  
In addition, it carries profiles of all those illegally detained by  
the Delhi Police Special Cell in connection with the Delhi blasts; a  
section on virtual terror that anti-terror or special cells of the  
police departments unleash in the name of fighting terror: illegal  
detentions, false recoveries, forging evidence etc. Special reference  
is made to the case of Irshad Ali and Md. Qamar, who were implicated  
in a false terror case by a team of the Delhi Police Special Cell.  
Incidentally, many members of this team were part of the Batla House  
'encounter' too.


Shuddhabrata Sengupta
The Sarai Programme at CSDS
Raqs Media Collective
shuddha at sarai.net
www.sarai.net
www.raqsmediacollective.net