Supreme Court Directs Assam Human Rights Commission to Investigate Alleged Fake Encounters
The Supreme Court has ordered the Assam Human Rights Commission (AHRC) to conduct an independent and expeditious inquiry into allegations of fake police encounters in Assam, following a petition highlighting serious concerns about extrajudicial killings. The directive, issued by a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh, emphasizes the gravity of the allegations and the need to uphold the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The petition, filed by advocate Arif Md Yeasin Jwadder, challenged a Gauhati High Court order from January 2023 that dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking an independent probe into 171 alleged fake encounters between May 2021 and August 2022. The petitioner claimed these incidents, which reportedly resulted in 56 deaths and 145 injuries, including four custodial deaths, violated the Supreme Court’s guidelines laid down in People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. State of Maharashtra (2014). These guidelines mandate independent investigations, forensic analysis, and magisterial inquiries into police encounters.
The Supreme Court acknowledged that while a blanket judicial direction based solely on the compilation of cases was not warranted, the allegations of fake encounters were serious. “The use of excessive or unlawful force by public authorities against a victim cannot be legitimized,” the bench observed, noting that proven fake encounters would constitute a grave violation of constitutional rights. The court entrusted the AHRC with the responsibility to conduct a fair and impartial inquiry, directing it to issue a public notice inviting victims or their families to participate in the proceedings.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing Jwadder, argued that Assam had seen rampant non-compliance with the PUCL guidelines, with FIRs often registered against victims rather than the accused police personnel. He cited specific cases, including one where a woman alleged her husband was tortured and killed in custody, with injuries suggesting severe mistreatment. Bhushan also highlighted 135 cases involving bullet injuries, underscoring the scale of the issue.
The Assam government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, defended the state’s actions, asserting that the PUCL guidelines were being followed “to the hilt” and that investigations were conducted for all incidents. Mehta questioned the petitioner’s motives, arguing that targeting security personnel could demoralize them, especially given Assam’s history of militancy. The court, however, clarified that the PUCL guidelines focus on investigating the incident itself, not necessarily implicating police officers without evidence.
The bench directed the AHRC to ensure confidentiality for victims and their families and to engage independent investigators, such as retired or serving police officers with unblemished records, unconnected to the incidents. If the commission finds further investigation necessary, it has the authority to proceed accordingly. The Assam government was instructed to cooperate fully, providing access to all relevant records and removing any institutional barriers.
The court’s decision comes after earlier hearings where it expressed concern over the high number of encounters—171 incidents described as “alarming” in October 2024—and criticized the slow pace of magisterial inquiries. The bench also disapproved of the AHRC’s practice of closing complaints due to lack of follow-up by victims’ families, stressing that human rights commissions must proactively protect civil liberties.
Jwadder, who has been vocal about seeking justice, stated, “No one wearing a uniform should feel empowered to take a life without consequences. This fight will continue in the courtroom and the conscience of the nation.” The Supreme Court’s order marks a significant step toward accountability, reinforcing the role of human rights commissions in safeguarding constitutional protections.
Literal Law will continue to monitor developments in this case as the AHRC undertakes its inquiry.
