Today: Jun 18, 2024

Hyderpora encounter: Amir Magray’s father files petition in J&K HC to seek return of body

3 mins read

Jammu: The father of Amir Magray, one of the four persons killed in an encounter in Hyderpora area of Srinagar in November, on Thursday filed a petition in the Jammu and Kashmir High Court seeking the return of his body of his son, maintaining his “innocence” and the family’s long contribution in the “fight against terrorism”.

The 18-page petition was filed by Amir’s father Mohammad Latief through his lawyers Deepika Singh Rajawat and Mohammad Arshad Chowdhary. The move came two days after the Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Jammu and Kashmir Police probing the Hyderpora encounter claimed that while one civilian “was killed by a foreign terrorist”, two others, including a local “militant” (Magray), died in “crossfire after being used as human-shield by the hiding terrorist”.

A “Pakistani terrorist” and three other persons were killed in Hyderpora on November 15 and the police claimed that all the slain men had links to militancy. The families of the three, alleging foul play, had claimed that they were innocent, prompting the police to order an inquiry. Lt Governor Manoj Sinha had also ordered a magisterial probe into the incident.

“…That being close to Amir, the petitioner knew everything good and bad about him, thus can state on oath that his son was never involved into any anti-national activities or was associated with any such outfit that conspires to bring harm to the nation,” Latief, a resident of Gool area of Ramban district, said in his petition.

Invoking Article 21 of the Constitution which extends the right to have decent burial as per religious ceremonies and rules, for his son, the petitioner said he has been instrumental in fighting and curbing militancy in Gool and Singaldan area by working as a civilian volunteer with the Army.

Referring to an incident of August 06, 2005, when he along with his wife and other family members “killed a Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorist who barged into his house and fired indiscriminately upon the inmates”, the petitioner said he was conferred the State Award for Bravery for the year 2012 by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir for showing exemplary courage despite being injured in the firing which also resulted in the death of his cousin.

“That apart from the same, the petitioner has been well appreciated by the Indian Army for his service towards the nation in eliminating militancy in his area — Gool Sangaldan, Ramban,” the petition said, enclosing copies of appreciation letters and certificates given to him by authorities in acknowledgement of his service.

In view of the family’s open support to the Army, the petitioner has remained vulnerable to attacks, owing to which security was provided to them, which is still in place outside their house.

“…it is obvious that Amir was groomed in an atmosphere of patriotism and away from anti-national activities and forces, thereby, associating Amir with terrorism is not justified to any stretch of imagination and shall also discourage all those who hold India close to their hearts and are fighting terrorism in difficult situation in Jammu and Kashmir, without caring about their lives and families,” the petition said.

Referring to the return of the bodies of two others, a building landlord and a doctor with whom Amir was working as an office peon on November 18, the petition pleaded the court to direct the respondents — Union Home Ministry, Jammu and Kashmir administration and Director General of Police — to hand over his body to the family.

“The magisterial probe was time-bound and was supposed to submit its report within 15 days but despite passage of more than one month, no such report has been submitted so far,” the petition said.

It said the petitioner met the Lt Governor on December 07 to press for the return of Amir’s body and for the making magisterial probe public, and the LG “sought two days” time to make the report public, but the time has lapsed giving cause of action to the petitioner to approach the court by filing the present petition.

The petitioner said he and his wife are grieving and restless as the respondents have not even given them a chance to see the face of their son the last time.

Expressing his wish to bury his son close to his house, the petitioner wants to ensure burial of his dead son within a prescribed period after exhumation and in an atmosphere required to maintain peace.

Seeking an early hearing of his plea, the petitioner pleaded in his appeal that the exhumation of Amir’s body needs to be done at the earliest to save it from getting fully decomposed.