IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1833 of 2010 1. The Superintendent of Police (Crime), C.I.D.,Bihar, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Department of Home (Police), Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Superintendent of Police, Jehanabad. … Petitioners. Versus 1. In the matter of suo motu action by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Re the mater of the citizen of the District Jehanabad. .. Opposite party 2. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Jehanabad. … 2nd Set opposite parties. --------- For the petitioners : Mr. J. P. Kishore, Adv. . ----------- 2. 18.05.2010 In this application, the petitioners, the officials of the State of Bihar have made following prayer; “1. That the instant modification/clarification petition has been filed to modify/clarifying the order dated 10.5.2002 passed in CWJC No. 6787 of 2000 Hon’ble Chief Justice Mr. Ravi S. Dhawan and Hon’ble Justice Mr. Aftab Alam only to the extent for a direction to the authority concerned to provide facsimile of the enquiry report along with the medical (injury) report submitted by the then District and Session Judge, Jehanaband before this Hon’ble Court in connection with Senari incident.” From the reading of the order dated 10.5.2002 in C.W.J. C. No. 6787 of 2000 it would appear that in a suo motu action taken by this Court wherein it was held as 2 follows; “…. By the time June 2000 arrived and the matter was listed on 25th June 2001, one of the State Counsel appearing in the case stated that the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) is questioning the veracity of claims in the incident particularly that the private parts of women received injuries. This was not the context of the inquiry. The Court indicated to counsel the fact that women were beaten is not in issue. The issue to be inquired into is who beat them. The photographs which had been taken by the Judicial Officers who conducted the inquiry had been sealed by the court. This was done to protect the identity and the modesty of the women. The photographs have been sealed because the women were half naked. The State of Bihar was clearly making an effort to purchase time as if to dilute the significance of incident knowing that public memory is effaced with time. The State of Bihar forgot that they have no “adversary” in the case. The village women of Senari who were beaten, having subjected themselves to inquiries and investigations ordered by the court as also by the police, now suffered the memories of the incident. As nothing concrete and tangible was coming from the State of Bihar on 9 November 2001 the Court had the sealed photographs opened and placed them at the Bar so that the State Counsel present in the court could see themselves the injuries which had been inflicted on the women and compare the injuries with reports which have been submitted by the District Judge whether the preliminary or the final report. 3 The Senari incident was not a concocted one. It was not the figment of anybody’s imagination. I was violence at the hands of the police wherein the women were beaten. The injuries have been catalogued against each woman who was examined by the State doctors in the presence of the Judicial Officers. By the time the second round of photographs had been taken the injuries were surfacing on the skin whether inflicted by rifle-butt, baton and lathies. The black, blue and red of injuries is clearly visible to the naked eye. The only short defence before the court was that the husbands and the sons of the women were culprits and criminals and they were being shielded in by these women who were preventing their arrest. This may be true or it may be incorrect. The question arises why should the women be beaten. It was stated before the Court that this action of the police was in self-defence as they had resorted to stone throwing. The question is whether the women were beaten at arm’s length. The two reports of the District Judge, Jehanabad are in detail. It names each woman who was beaten. It refers to injuries report of State Doctors. The only difference is that this was an enquiry report ordered by the court and the inquiry which was conducted by the District Judge with a team of Judicial Officers as also State doctors examining the injured women who may become the subject matter of yet another investigation. But, what use will an investigation be now ? The scar of injuries had disappeared. The hurt only remained in the mind. No respect was shown by the police to women. It is not the case the police had resorted to firing. 4 The Privacy of women in Senari was invaded. It was a face to face confrontation. The police used their rifles, batons and lathies, and then claimed that it was used in self-defence. The women has resorted to defending themselves with their pots and pans. But, why this bestiality and boorishness in beating up women, just because the men were not available ? This was a clear case of violation of human rights and also a case of disregard for the rights of illiterate poor women in rural Bihar. This incident at Senari shows when it comes to police dealing with the weak and women, beating takes a sadistic form far outside the limits of correct police procedure. This matter cannot linger at the High Court as public justice expects that at least that which the High Court can do should be done. On record are names of the women. The injuries have been classified as serious, grievous hurt and simple. The women have been enlisted as below. Those who received serious and grievous hurt injuries are 1) Manju Devi 2) Surajmani Devi 3) Mithilesh Devi 4) Chinta Devi 5) Shakuntla Devi 6) Neetu Kumari 7) Suman Kumari 8) Lal Keshwar Devi 9) Urmila Devi 10) Krishanamani Devi and 11) Gayatri Devi. Those who received simple injuries are 1) Anju Devi 2) Girija Devi 3) Balkeshwar Devi 4) Mithilesh Devi wife of Mahesh Sharma 5) Kaushalya Devi @ Sushila Devi 6) Sharda Devi 7) Vijay Laxmi 8) Sheela Devi 9) Anandi Devi 10) Devmani Devi 11) Manorma Devi 12) Radha Devi 13) Bramha Devi 14) Prince Kumar 15) Bina Devi 16) Sunita Devi 17) Safalta Kumari 18) Chinta Devi 19) Kalawati Devi 20) 5 Dharam Sheela Devi 21) Neelam Devi 22) Jaimali Devi 23) Pramila Devi 24) Shanti Devi 25) Awadh Sao 26) Suresh Sharma 27) Jai Prakash 28) Ram Jhari Devi 29) Jyoti Devi 30) Pratima Kumari and 31) Sabya Kumari. In the circumstances the court feels that such of those who received serious and grievous hurt injuries will be entitled to the compensation of Rs.10,000/- ( Rupees Ten Thousand) and those who received simple injuries will be entitled to the compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand). This compensation will be deposited with the District Magistrate, Jehanabad within two months from today. Thereafter, on verification by a board which shall constitute of the District Magistrate, Jehanabad and the District Judge, Jehanabad, the compensation will be distributed to these women. The photographs which are lying on record shall now be the part of the record as they are part of the tragic incident at Senari where it has been established that women were beaten brutally by the police which entered their village. Some of these photographs have taken exposure of naked women. Copies of these photographs will not be issued to the press nor published. But, should they need to be seen by any further inquiry or investigation this record will be available. Thus, the suo motu action succeeds with directions as above. It will be only appropriate that a copy or a facsimile of the entire record be sent to the Human Rights Commission because the Commission had also been concerned at the violence which occurred at the hands of the police at Senari. The photographs of the 6 women taken when injuries were fresh are part of the record. The High Court requests the Human Right Commission that these photographs may not be made public to protect the identity of the women.” Inasmuch from the aforementioned findings recorded by the Division Bench, it would be clear that the CID of the State Administration had itself questioned the report of the District Judge, Jehanabad as also sought to disbelieve the photographs of the innocent women, the prayer made in this application after almost 10 years of the disposal of the case without disclosing the purpose cannot be allowed. In this context, it has to be noted that Karpi (Jehanabad) P. S. Case No. 64 of 2000 dated 29.7.2000 was instituted by the police some 10 years back and it is now being claimed that photographs and the facsimile is required for investigation of the aforementioned case. It is really amazing to find that investigation of the criminal case is pending over 10 years. Be that as it may, on the earlier occasion, the Division Bench had strictly prohibited issuance of copies of photographs or facsimile of report of District Judge by 7 taking into account the privacy of the women who had suffered in the indiscriminate assault by the police such prayer cannot be allowed. If however, the purpose of the Investigating Agency can be fulfilled only by looking into the photographs and/or enquiry report and medical (injury) report the Registrar General of this Court will make them available only for its perusal. Such inspection shall not be afforded to a police authority, lesser in the rank of Superintendent of Police who too would be only entitled for its inspection in the Chamber of the Registrar General of this Court. With the aforementioned observations, this application is disposed of. kanchan/ (Dipak Misra, CJ) (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)