The trigger-happy ways of the Jharkhand Police

On Monday morning, Dashrath Nayak and Premchand Mahto [Ramlakhan Mahto] were standing outside the gates of Inland Power Limited (IPL) in Ramgarh, Jharkhand. They were among a crowd of protesters who had gathered to attend the meeting called by IPL’s management and Jharkhand Police. There’s been an ongoing dispute for the past two months over a variety of issues. IPL showed up during the first round of investment in Jharkhand in 2004. They started operating the first phase of their power plant (63 MW) in 2014 and the second phase (63 MW) is in the offing. The pollution caused by the power plant has sparked an agitation among local villagers, which over the past two months cemented into a list of 22 demands that was presented to IPL’s management.

According to Jharkhand Police, around four in the evening of August 29, the protestors started damaging company property. This took place an area known as Tonagattu, which comes under Gola Police station. “We first lathi-charged the crowd,” Sanjay Kumar, Station House Officer (SHO), Gola police station, told Newslaundry. Then, the police fired 47 rounds, according to Kumar.

Nayak and Mahto were killed in these firings. Thirteen were reportedly injured. Section 144 has since been imposed on the area around the factory and in surrounding villages. “We were chased by the police for 30 kilometers. Entire night we were hiding in the nearby hill,” said Rajiv Jaiswal of Jharkhand Vikas Morcha – Prajatantrik (JVM), who was leading the workers.  

Raising serious questions about Jharkhand police’s action, the newspaper Hindustan carried this headline, “Na warning, na hawai firing, sidhe goli (No warning, no shots in the air, direct firing).” 

According to Kumar, the reports are wrong and six have been injured. “Chhay logo ko injury hai, teen bullet mein, do maar gae, ek bache hain. Teen aur bhagne ke karm mein injure hue, (Six were hurt, three of which were bullet injuries two are dead and the third is injured. Three other people were injured while trying to escape),” he told Newslaundry. The police also deny Hindustan’s implication that the firing was unprovoked.

There’s some confusion about what exactly happened on Monday and why. “On August 13, we submitted a 21-point demand letter, giving seven days ultimatum to IPL management to address demands,” Jaiswal told Newslaundry. The list included demands of jobs for affected villagers, providing minimum wages to those employed in IPL, and setting up schools in the area under Corporate Social Responsibility.

Sixteen days later, on August 29, a meeting was finalised between village representatives, the management and the police. When the representatives reached IPL at 11 am for the meeting, they were informed that the venue had been changed. “The meeting was shifted to Block Development Officer’s (BDO) building, to which villagers protested,” said a local journalist who did not wish to be named. “Angry protesters started damaging IPL’s water pump. The police lathicharged and consequently villagers started stone pelting.” The BDO’s vehicle was allegedly charred by protesters.

The police has accused JVM leader Rajiv Jaiswal of leading a 300-strong mob. They have also alleged that the protesters were the first to open fire. SHO Sanjay Kumar said that they retaliated after five rounds were fired by protestors.

Yet Deputy Development Commissioner Sunil Kumar didn’t mention gun shots fired by the villagers while speaking about the incident to Newslaundry.

“Standard Operating Procedures were followed,” said Kumar, who is also the in-charge Deputy Commissioner. “Even when our Block Development Officer (BDO) got hurt in the stone pelting, he didn’t order firing. Police first resorted to lathicharge and when villagers didn’t stop, they fired in the air to disperse the crowd.”

As far as manuals are concerned, the standard procedure of crowd dispersal requires the police to first obtain permission to fire from the magistrate or senior most officer available, or an officer above the rank of sub-inspector. However, shots should be fired in the air or below the waist.

In this case, while one slain villager was shot in the neck and other was shot above his waist. When asked, SHO Kumar admitted that police resorted to targeted firing.

Vibhuti Narain Rai, former Indian Police Services (IPS) officer and author of the book Hashimpura 22 May: The Forgotten Story of India’s Biggest Custodial Killing, told Newslaundry that direct firing should be the last resort for police in extreme conditions. “One or two shots are enough to disperse a crowd. If 47 rounds of bullet were fired, then its shows inefficiency of the police. They were not dealing with insurgents or armed Naxalites.”

Jharkhand CM Rahguvar Das has sought a report from the Director General of Police. South Chotanagpur Commissioner Dr Pradeep Kumar and Director Inspector General (DIG) Upendra Kumar told the media yesterday that an enquiry report would be submitted within a week.

Although this area of Jharkhand’s Ramgarh district doesn’t have any alarming criminal record or Naxal background, it isn’t the first instance of police fire. Last year, while covering the land acquisition protests in Jharkhand’s Devipur village, this reporter had learnt that the police had fired 42 rounds (including eight from AK-47) to disperse a crowd of protestors. Questions are being raised today about Jharkhand because Mahto and Nayak were killed. In incidents like the action in Devipur, there were no casualties that could speak through statistics about how Jharkhand Police crushes protests.