advertisement
Video Editor: Purnendu Pritam
An encounter that took place seven years ago, in the Naxal area of Sarkeguda in Chhattisgarh, has brought the security forces under scrutiny. It is being said that the encounter, that led to the death of 17 ‘naxalites’ in 2012, was fake.
Security forces had claimed that they had information of naxalite presence in the area. Local police and CRPF teams reached the spot and clashes took place in which 17 'naxalites' were killed.
The then Raman Singh government had formed an investigation committee, under the leadership of retired Madhya Pradesh High Court judge, Justice VK Agarwal.
The 75-page report has raised questions on the power of security forces. When the incident took place, the Centre was being run by Congress-led UPA government and a few Congress leaders from Madhya Pradesh stood against their own party over this issue.
The investigation report has disclosed some sensational facts. On the basic question of naxalite presence in the area, the report states:
The security forces had claimed that the villagers opened fire on them but the report rejects these claims, saying that the investigation doesn’t show that those present at the meeting fired.
It also says that if the firing took place then DIG S Elango and Deputy Commandant Manish Barmola would have retaliated in self-defense. They were fully armed but they didn’t fire. It seems like a police party guide expressed suspicion of some attack from a distance and the security forces hastily opened fire.
It cannot be denied that these security personnel got hurt due to firing by their own comrades, the report added.
Villagers had claimed that hours after the so-called encounter, at 10:30 pm, a person was picked from his house the next day on 29 June. Reports seem to acknowledge this claim.
On claims of recovered evidence being tampered with, Justice Agarwal said that the investigation was manipulated.
The commission also expressed doubt on the reason behind the meeting of Sarkeguda, Kottaguda and Rajpenta. After the clashes, the villagers had claimed that the meeting was held for the arrangement of festivity for Beej Pandum but the commission doesn't acknowledge this.
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)