Where Justice shan’t be Denied

Injustice and oppression of sorts like fake encounter, illegal detention, arrest, torture and killing of innocent civilians, etc. have become the way of the world. In at least many, if not most, cases and after long legal battles demands of justice do not seem to have met. The infamous Pathribal fake encounter in Jammu and…

Written by

Published on

Injustice and oppression of sorts like fake encounter, illegal detention, arrest, torture and killing of innocent civilians, etc. have become the way of the world. In at least many, if not most, cases and after long legal battles demands of justice do not seem to have met. The infamous Pathribal fake encounter in Jammu and Kashmir in which five civilians were killed is one such case. This case has strengthened the demand of repeal of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA).

The contention of the accused army men was that that the five men killed were foreign militants who had carried out the massacre of Sikhs in Chattisinghpora a few days earlier. But the CBI, which had taken up probe into the encounter, concluded that a Brigadier, a Lieutenant Colonel, two Majors, and a Subedar of 7 Rashtriya Rifles had staged the encounter, picking up civilians from the Anantnag area and killing them in cold blood. While the massacre of Sikhs in Chattisinghpora was condemnable, the fact remains that picking up civilians and killing them in cold blood more to save the skin of the armed personnel on duty is a matter of grave concern. The officers named moved against the CBI charge sheet, arguing that under AFSPA, prior sanction was required to prosecute them. The Apex Court directed the Army to either sanction the prosecution of its officers or court-martial them. As expected, the Army chose the latter option and held that ‘the evidence recorded could not establish a prima facie case against any of the accused’.

This is not a solitary case wherein the perpetrators of the crime have gone scot-free. It can be argued that the Apex Court offered the Army the two options on technical ground, and the Army chose the better of the two in its own interest. But the vital question is whether pronouncing verdict on the basis of technicality meets the demands of justice. The answer is a big no. Such a case justifies the need of a day when real justice shall be delivered, calling a spade a spade. Of all the systems and faiths, it is only Islam which has a strong concept of the Day of Judgement when justice shall not be denied. It is so because Allah, the Almighty is All-Knowing and knows perfectly well who has done what; His judgement shall not depend on any technicality or any other limitation; and He has promised that there shall not be any injustice on the Day of Judgement.