Kheda public flogging: SP justifies act even as police interim report finds 6 cops at fault

The SP in an affidavit said “it is only with a view to maintain peace and harmony that the suspects were cornered so that no untoward incident further takes place”. Meanwhile, the interim report by the deputy superintendent of police of Kapadvanj division ruled that “as responsible police officers” they were required to “control the accused persons using other means and shift the accused to other safe places”.

Notably, the High Court is seized of a contempt petition for violation of arrest and custodial guidelines as laid down in the D K Basu judgment of the Supreme Court, moved by five Muslims who were publicly flogged, against 15 police officials, including Ahmedabad range IG, Kheda superintendent of police (SP), 10 constables of Matar police station at Kheda and local crime branch at Kheda, police inspector of Kheda local crime branch, and two Police Sub-Inspectors — one of Matar police station and the other of the Kheda local crime branch.

A day after an alleged stone pelting incident during Navratri in 2022, which allegedly involved the said Muslims along with others, the police had rounded up the men and flogged them in public view at the town square and allegedly circulated videos of the flogging.

The directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of D K Basu versus the State of West Bengal provides guidelines to be followed by the police during arrest and detention.

Additionally, two sets of affidavits were filed by the policemen accused of being participants in the flogging. While one set primarily justified the flogging as an exercise to control law and order and pointed at criminal antecedents of one of the victims, another set of affidavits, filed by policemen facing departmental proceedings after being found to be prima facie involved in the physical abuse, submitted that such a contempt petition is not maintainable and that they were only discharging their duties, acting within the scope and ambit of their powers.

Hetalben Rabari, a police-sub inspector (PSI) at Matar police station, who is one among the 15 personnel facing the contempt petition, has tendered an “unconditional apology”.

He added “even if the allegations…are tilted to be correct and true, even then, the same were resorted to only with a view to deal with the petitioners in an efficient and effective manner and to control the law and order situation and further to prevent any kind of communal riots or any kind of communal turmoil or communal unrest among the residents of said village and only with a view to see that the situation at the relevant point of time, would come under the control of law and order that such measures/actions as alleged seem to have been taken.”

Rabari in her affidavit filed on February 16 further alleged that the victims of flogging have “tried to gather the sympathy” of the court by mentioning that one of the victim was 62 years old “but has surreptitiously not mentioned that he is an opposition leader and there are cases of rioting against him and also one of the prime accused of the ‘Godhra kand’ case.”

Rabari’s affidavit was also filed on behalf of four other accused police personnel, including the head constable of Nadiad.

In another affidavit filed by the police inspector of local crime branch A V Parmar, making submissions on behalf of himself and six other accused policemen, it was stated that there has not been any judicial finding of any court that the D K Basu judgment has been violated and that the contempt proceedings against the police are not maintainable.

Submitting that the petitioner-Muslims “created an atmosphere of fear and terror amongst law abiding residents of the village”, the police “acted within the scope and ambit of their powers” and such acts of flogging was “in discharge of their duties”.

It has also been submitted by Parmar that the contempt of D K Basu judgment would not hold following amendments to the CrPC which incorporated the guidelines thus prescribed in the judgment. Of the seven police personnel on whose behalf the affidavit has been filed, six have been held to be “prima facie involved in physical abuse” in an interim inquiry report by the deputy superintendent of police and have been issued departmental chargesheet.

In a third affidavit filed by Rajeshkumar Gadhiya, SP of Kheda-Nadiad, it has been stated that following representations by political leaders, including three MLAs — Gyasuddin Sheikh, Imran Khedawala and Mohammad Peerzada — to the Gujarat DGP, the Ahmedabad Range IG had addressed a communication to the SP Kheda-Nadiad to inquire about the incident. Pursuant to this, deputy superintendent of police of the Kapadvanj division had submitted an interim report on December 1, 2022 to the SP Kheda-Nadiad.

In this interim report, the deputy superintendent had stated that when the Muslims accused of stone-pelting had started misbehaving with the police, as responsible officers, “instead of physically abusing the accused (Muslims) with lathi, the officers were required to control the accused persons using other means and to shift the accused to other safe means”.

The SP’s affidavit states that based on the interim report, a departmental charge sheet has been issued to six erring officers, “who were found prima facie involved in the incident of physical abuse”, including A V Parmar, three unarmed constables and two armed constables.

The SP’s affidavit records that the alleged stone pelting at the garba venue by the Muslims was premeditated with a view to “create fear amongst the Hindu community and to disturb the law and order” and the suspects were “cornered so that no untoward incident further takes place.”