Rajvinder S. Bains

Rajvinder S. Bains is a Punjab & Haryana High Court attorney with over 20 years of experience defending human rights in Punjab. He is the lead attorney representing Paramjit Kaur Khalra in the murder case of her husband Jaswant Singh Khalra.

Courts have been extremely insensitive. In fact, on these issue of “disappearances,” all are insensitive – the police, the civil administration, the media, as well as the mainstream India. Because the major part of “disappearances” and custodial violence is directed against the dissidents and also against the minorities. And in the context, it is contrasted as if it is against national interest. So the whole country becomes silenced: when you target Sikhs in Punjab, you target Naxalites in Andhra Pradesh, you target the Muslim militants in Kashmir. So it is always presented as if: Sikhs versus the rest of India. Therefore, whatever sympathy the system could have, that also vanishes. And they are treated as terrorists not entitled to any rights. And that’s how even the court treats them. Even our habeas corpus petitions during those days were not entertained.
 
Therefore, only in rare cases, where you have very alert parents or alert relatives, or alert friends, who pursued the matter immediately to the Supreme Court, that there were inquiries by central agencies like CBI [Central Bureau of Investigation] and truth has come out. In ordinary cases, this procedure has failed completely.

For over a year, Bains has waited for a substantive hearing in the Khalra murder case, relating to the Central Bureau of Investigation’s failure to investigate and prosecute former police chief KPS Gill for his role in Khalra’s murder.

First, you file a writ in the High Court for an inquiry. If you are lucky, an inquiry is ordered. Then the report comes, either by the sessions judge inquiry or by some other officer’s inquiry that, yes, there is something in the allegation and in fact, his son has been actually abducted and killed. Thereafter, again there will be objections by the police. And an FIR [First Information Report] will be directed to be registered. The same police will register an FIR. Then, they will not collect evidence. Again, you go back to the court. Now you say, the police is not doing anything even after registration of the FIR. Then, the court will again direct, present the final report charge-sheet against the accused. Then, they will present the accused before the court and present the charge-sheet. Then, the witnesses will not give evidence because the same police will influence the witnesses, will advise them not to do it, will threaten them. In fact, in many cases they would register criminal cases against the witnesses, also. So the witnesses run away. And if finally, the witnesses also give evidence, finally the last stage will be they will try to purchase the victim family, give them, lure them with enormous amounts of money.

My experience is that our High Court, has in fact tried always to minimize the role of the police officer’s abusing his powers, on the premise that he was fighting the national battle against terrorism and therefore, he has to be shown all concessions and given all protections. And only in extreme cases, where there was no other possible interpretation, they have chosen to punish.