Supreme Court Drops Case Against 30 Indian Army Personnel for Not Having AFSPA Sanctions in Connection With Nagaland Civilian Killings
Last Updated on September 17, 2024 by Arti Kumari
As a result of the Union Ministry of Home Affairs’ refusal to grant permission to begin criminal charges against thirty-one PARA (Special Forces) troops who are alleged to have killed civilians in Nagaland, the Supreme Court today, September 17, dismissed FIRs and halted all proceedings against them.
In the Mon area of Nagaland, on December 4, 2021, Army soldiers are reported to have opened fire on a pick-van containing coal workers, believing them to be insurgents. As the crisis worsened, additional people were killed, and an Army personnel also perished. Thirteen civilians lost their lives in all.
They were the subject of a criminal prosecution, which called for the MHA (competent authority) to grant punishments in accordance with Section 6 of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958.
This case is the result of two writ petitions that the wives of two Indian Army officers filed to have the suo moto FIR against their husbands and other personnel filed by the Nagaland Police under Sections 302, 307, 326, 201, 34, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) as well as the recommendations and findings of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) quashed. The incident led to the formation of the SIT.
The Supreme Court issued an interim decision on July 19, 2022, stopping further proceedings in this case due to the failure to collect the necessary sanctions. The MHA has denied to grant sanctions to begin criminal proceedings, according to Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhatti, who told the court when the case was brought up for hearing on March 7, this year.
In light of the fact that Section 6 of the AFSPA forbids any prosecution, litigation, or other legal action without the prior approval of the Central Government, the Court said today that it would not accept the submissions made by the parties.
As a result, it declared: “The proceedings resulting from the contested FIRs deserve to be quashed, and the interim order, granted by the order dated 19.07.2022, deserves to be made absolute.”
However, Mr. K.N. Balgopal, the State of Nagaland’s Advocate General, informed the Court that a writ suit has been filed with the Supreme Court, contesting the validity of the MHA’s refusal of sanction. “We have no manner of doubt that, in case, at some stage, sanction is granted under Section 6 of the AFSP Act, 1958, the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIRs are liable to be continued,” a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and P.S. Varale stated in light of this.
The Court has made it clear that the actions in the contested FIRs will proceed if Section 6 of the AFSPA is used to grant sanction at any point.
Furthermore, the Court declined to issue any orders that Balgopal requested about the officers’ disciplinary actions. “The concerned wing of the Armed Forces would be at liberty to take or not to take any disciplinary proceedings against its officers,” it stated in its conclusion.
Case Title: Rabina Ghale & Anr v. UOI & Ors, Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 265 of 2022 and Anjali Gupta v. UOI & Ors, Writ Petition (Criminal) NO. 250 OF 2022
