By Abdul Bari Masoud / Muslim Mirror
New Delhi: A human rights campaign group condemned the ‘murder’ of 19-year-old-Muslim boy in Tihar Jail last week and demanded immediate action against the Jail superintendent of Central Jail 5 followed with a probe into the incident.
Janhastakshep, a campaign against fascist designs, on Wednesday also demanded arrest of the culprits involved in this gruesome act and a judicial inquest in the matter under the watch of National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and compensation to the family of Zeeshan.
Releasing a fact-finding report on the shockingly brutal murder of Jishan (as spelt in the FIR while in Aadhaar card his name is Zeeshan), the Janhastakshep team members claimed that there were severe marks of injury all over the body, and that his bones had been broken. It also highlighted deplorable state of India’s jurisprudence where a boy had to spend three months on the charge of stealing packets of cigarettes.
Jishan had been in jail for nearly three months for having stolen some cigarette packets from a roadside pan shop, and he ultimately ended up losing his life for that on February 15.
On 19 February Janhastakshep constituted a two-member team comprising of Dr Vikas Bajpai, assistant professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University and senior journalist Satyendra Ranjan to investigate the sequence of events leading up to Jishan’s death.
Dr Vikas Bajpai said the team spoke to:
- Parents, other family members and neighbors of Jishan.
- Arbab Ali, journalist
- Investigating Officer in the FIR filed against Jishan at Preet Vihar police station, Sandeep Kumar.
- Counsel for Jishan, Ms Apoorva Bhati.
- Sub-Inspector Niranjan Kumar, IO of the case filed at Hari Nagar police station in the matter of Jishan’s death.
6.. Abhimanyu and Kiran (PS to the DG prisons) in the Office of the Director General Prisons, Sandeep Goyal.
- Office of the Superintendent of Central Jail 5, Tihar Jail, Hukum Chand.
- Law officer of Tihar Jail, Zorawar Singh.
- Medical Director of Deen Dayal Upadhaya (DDU) hospital, Dr B L Chaudhary.
- Some other persons who spoke to us on the condition of anonymity.
Findings
* Jishan was a resident of E – 40/144, jhuggi near Radhu Place, Laxmi Nagar, Preet Vihar East, in East Delhi, where his parents along with their children have lived for past 30 years. Jishan’s father Mohmmed Yakub, age 45 years is a cycle rickshaw puller, and his mother Shanno, age 42 years, works as a domestic help in the nearby colonies. Jishan himself used to work as a motor mechanic.
*A FIR, No. 455/21 was filed against Jishan under sections 457 (Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment up to five years) and 380 (theft in dwelling, house etc. with provision of imprisonment extending up to 7 years) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) Act of 1860, on the 19th of November, 2022.
*The FIR was filed on the complaint made by one Anil Chaurasia for an alleged theft of cigarette packets from his roadside shop by Jishan after breaking open the lock of his shop on the 19th of November 2021. *
*Jishan’s mother Shanno alleged that the police had demanded Rs 15,000 from her for out of court settlement of the case. As the family was not in a position to give the money, Jishan was sent to jail on 20th November, 2021.
*On 15th of February, 2022, Jishan’s parents received a phone call from sub-inspector Niranjan Kumar of Hari Nagar police station who informed them that their son was unwell and had been admitted in DDU hospital. Upon reaching the hospital they were informed that their son was dead and they were shown the dead body of their son. The boy had severe marks of injury all over the body which suggested that he had been brutally assaulted physically rather than having suffered some illness as they were being told.
*The family was handed over the body on the 17th of February, 2022 after the postmortem. While they performed ablution on the body before burial the family members noticed that Jishan’s bones had been broken at several places, including ribs, shoulders and elbows etc. From the pictures of Jishan’s dead body shown to the Janhastakshep inquiry team it was apparent that these injuries were not localized to just one part of the body, but were all over the body. The distribution of these injuries over the body rules out the possibility of the injuries being accidental or self-inflicted.
*Unable to afford a lawyer of his own, Jishan was provided legal counsel, Ms Apoorva Bhati, from the Legal Aid Services. After his first two bail applications were rejected.
The court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) Pankaj Arora, Karkardoma Courts granted a conditional bail in the third bail application moved by the lawyer of the accused on 25th January, 2022. However, Jishan continued to languish in jail as he did not have a surety of the said amount. Meanwhile, in the routine hearings of the case in online mode held on 21st of January and 4th of February, 2022, court noted that Jishan had not been produced before the court. In the hearing on 4th February the court also failed to take notice as to why the accused had not been released despite having granted the bail.
*The court also failed to avail of the opportunity to grant bail on the basis of personal bond of the accused in the absence of the surety. This is the state of affairs despite the fact that in the 1978 matter of Moti Ram v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Supreme Court bench headed by late Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer had deemed the issue of unreasonably high sureties demanded by the courts as a human rights problem. It was suggested by the court that the surety amount should be determined in consideration of the socio-economic condition of the accused person.
*It is even more unfortunate that Jishan was finally granted bail on personal bond on the 14th of February, 2022, the same date when he is said to have been admitted at Deen Dayal Upadhaya hospital for treatment of his illness, and later ended up dying on the 15th February when his parents saw his dead body with scores of injuries.
Dr Bajpai said Janhastakshep sought answers in respect of a judicial inquest, as per categorical guidelines regarding the ‘Standard Operating Procedure’ (SOP) in the matter of deaths in state custody that have been issued by , having been ordered in the matter Jishan’s death in judicial custody from various officials of the jail administration.
“Our quest for answers from the jail administration only led to reaffirmation of an acute sense of criminal indifference and nihilism on their part towards the safety and well-being of prison inmates; especially those belonging to the poorer and marginalized socioeconomic backgrounds, and are languishing in jails for having allegedly committed petty crimes,” said Satyendra Ranjan.
Rather than the giving any reply to our queries, the office of the Director General of Prisons kept directing us to one or the other official of the jail for relevant information, he added.
“When we again pressed the Law Officer for telling whether an inquest had actually been instituted, Zorawar Singh only replied that this has to be done as per the standing instructions”.
A senior doctor at DDU hospital who was in the know of things regarding the post-mortem of Jishan, stated that there we multiple injury marks on his body that were four to five days old, said Dr Bajpa.i
They alleged that the jail authorities were trying to wishy-washy Jishan’s murder under their watch.
“ Superficial trappings of parliamentary democracy apart, the present scheme of things ends up reducing the working masses of India to being subjects of India’s ruling elite who have gotten used to seeing themselves in the image of new ‘emperors’ of the country.
It is noteworthy that the sections 457 and 380 slapped on Jishan for the ‘grand’ heft of stealing cigarette packets from a shop derive directly from the colonial era Indian Penal Code (IPC) Act of 1860.
“Crime committed under these sections is non-bailable. Likewise, in dismissing the first two bail applications filed on behalf of the accused; then granting conditional bail on production of a surety of Rs 20,000 without regard to the socioeconomic circumstances of the accused; in not taking any material cognizance of non-production of the accused in two consecutive hearings; in overlooking the fact that despite having been granted bail, why Jishan continued to languish in jail; and then issuing his release order on personal bond in the classic manner of too little, too late, the learned ACMM may still have satisfied the system he serves, as also his own conscience, for having done his duty”.
Janhastskshep demands:
- The Jail Superintendent of Central Jail at Tihar should be immediately suspended for having failed to uphold the safety of the prisoners under his watch. Other jail staffs that are in a position to tamper with the evidence in the case should be immediately changed from their present posting.
- The people suspected of involvement in the murder of Jishan should be immediately apprehended and booked under the appropriate sections of law.
- An inquest should be immediately initiated in the matter under the watch of NHRC.
- The NHRC should immediately take cognizance of the matter and adequate
- Compensation should be given by the government to the family of Jishan.
- Appropriate criminal proceedings should be carried out against the accused consequent to the findings of the inquest proceedings.
This article first appeared on muslimmirror.com