Submit to DeliciousSubmit to DiggSubmit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to StumbleuponSubmit to TechnoratiSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn

NNWN/ Srinagar, 2017-07-11

Farooq Ahmad Dar, a civilian who was used as human shield and tied to the Bonnet of the vehicle by Army on April 9, has got support from unexpected quarters. The State human rights commission directed the JK Government to compensate him with Rs ten lakhs on the ground that “such a treatment to human being can’t be accepted by any civilized society”.

“The report of the police accepts that Farooq Ahmad Dar … was tied to bonnet of a vehicle and used as human shield… There are laws in this country and international laws which prohibit such a treatment even to a convict. Such a treatment to human being cannot be accepted in a civilized society,” said Justice ( Retd) Bilal Nazki in his judgement. Nazki is the chairperson of the State human rights commission. “The protection of life and liberty of the people is basic responsibility of the state government. The Commission thinks it appropriate to direct the state government to pay compensation of Rs 10 lakhs to the victim”. 

It may be mentioned here that Army Major Nitin Leetul Gogoi had tied  Dar to a jeep on April 9 as a `human shield' in the face of heavy stone pelting by an angry mob. Gogoi's action stirred a huge controversy. Gogoi later clarified that he took the decision at a fraction of moment to rescue besieged officials and save lives. His actions were lauded by the Army Chief .The Commission, however, didn’t rule on the role and culpability of the army officer in the case citing the “limited applicability of the Protection for Human Rights Act 1993 to the state of Jammu and Kashmir”. While the army had ordered a probe into the incident, army chief Gen Bipin Rawat appreciated Major Gogoi’s act and also awarded him with a commendation medal.

Unlike Army, a human rights activist from Kashmir Ahsan Untoo approached the SHRC. The Commission in its judgment has said that the “State government cannot escape from the responsibility of having failed to protect human rights” of a citizen.