At 84, Shah Wali Mohammad was twice detained under allegations that didn’t pass muster in court | Anando Bhakto
The winter’s dim light exposes Haneefa Begum’s sad countenance. She is 72-years-old and her voice trembles as she makes a low, moaning sound. “Ab yahan koi nahin rehta (nobody lives here anymore),” she says as she enters her garden, leafless in December’s biting cold.
Inside the front room of her big, quaint house in Sopore town of Kashmir’s Baramulla district, one wonders what happened to the members of her family as she takes out some court papers from a folder and spreads them in front of her.
Her husband, Haji Sheikh Mohammad Yousuf, has been in jail for more than 15 months. Her elder son Altafur Rehman, a pharmacist, was gunned down by unidentified assailants in 2015 and her younger son, Abdul Rauf, a PhD student at Aligarh Muslim University, was killed, allegedly by security forces, in 2000 near Badami Bagh, a cantonment in Srinagar. “I now live with my elder son’s 36-year-old widow, two granddaughters and a grandson [who are] all schoolchildren,” says Haneefa.
Her house, silent except for the sound of her sniffling, gives no hint of its living occupants. Just as Sopore’s opulent natural surroundings give no idea of the infamous massacre of January 6, 1993 when India’s Border Security Force (BSF), following an ambush, allegedly burnt down houses and shops in this ‘apple town’, 50 kilometres northwest of Srinagar. The Indian government maintains the fire was caused by explosives stocked by militants who had attacked a BSF patrol party.
“Kaun kehta nahin Khuda ko Khuda, hamne kaha to saza payi” (Why would anyone not call God as God, [but] we were punished when we said so), says Haneefa, as she begins talking about her family. The choice of the couplet is not unwitting. It alludes to the instinctive call by Kashmiris for azadi (freedom) and describes how this call is nipped in the bud in (Indian-administered) Kashmir. For political workers affiliated with pro-freedom groups and parties, like Haneefa’s husband who is a member of the pro-Pakistan Jamaat-e-Islami, the ‘witch-hunt’ is even more intense.
Between Wani’s killing in July 2016 and February 2017, more than 750 habeas corpus petitions have been filed in Kashmir against detentions made under the PSA.
Pointing to the papers on the floor, Haneefa says the Jammu and Kashmir police detained Yousuf four times under the Public Safety Act (PSA) of 1978 in the span of about a year and a half. On three occasions, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court found no tenable grounds for his detention and quashed the orders issued for his detention under the PSA.
“The police [first] came here on the night of August 8, 2016,” she recounts. They wanted her husband to accompany them but he did not want to leave her alone at night. “He went to the police station the next morning. They arrested him.”
The summer of 2016 was an extraordinary time in the Kashmir valley. After a young militant commander, Burhan Wani, was gunned down by security forces in an encounter on July 8 that year in Anantnag (locally called Islamabad), 106 kilometres south of Sopore, the whole valley rose up in anti-India protests. By winter, more than 90 civilian protesters were dead. Thousands of others were injured. Hundreds, including minors, were blinded by the indiscriminate use of pellet guns by law enforcement agencies.
In order to quell the protests, the police also targeted pro-freedom political workers of all ages, including those who were 75 years and above, allege rights group. Most of them were detained either under Section 8 (i) or Section 8 (ii) of the PSA. The former section empowers law enforcement agencies to detain people without trial for a period of three months – which can be extended for up to one year – if they are involved in any activities deemed prejudicial to public order. The latter section gives the authorities the power to detain people without trial for a period of six months – that can extend up to two years – if they are involved in any activities deemed prejudicial to the security of the state.
A district magistrate has to subjectively satisfy himself that the relevant constitutional guarantees have been fulfilled before he issues a detention order under the PSA. “[The magistrates] never follow the constitutional safeguard,” says Nasir Qadri, who offers free counsel to PSA detainees.
“I was arrested because I am a member of Syed Ali Shah Geelani’s Tehreek-e-Hurriyat,” alleges 84-year-old Shah Wali Mohammad. “Whatever they [Jammu and Kashmir police] have written in the detention order is untrue.”
He says he was arrested on September 1, 2016, when he was returning to Sopore from a village called Tujjar. “The police stopped me midway and took me to Sopore Police Station where I was kept for one week. They issued a PSA order and shifted me to Kupwara jail, alleging that I had headed a mob that pelted stones at CRPF [Central Reserve Police Force] personnel at Sopore’s main chowk,” narrates the former school teacher of Handwara Government Primary School in Zachaldara village of Kupwara district. “Can I head a mob at 84?” he asks.
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court rubbished the charges against him when the matter reached its doors in February 2017.
“When the court quashed the first PSA order, he was released from one door but was re-arrested from the other door,” says Mohammad’s lawyer, Qadri. “The police told him they had arrested him on the basis of FIRs [first information reports] registered against him [for substantive offences].”
He was kept in detention at Baramulla’s district jail for 15 days. During this time, a second detention order under the PSA was issued and he was sent back to Kupwara jail.
The second detention order, according to Qadri, was in contradiction to the Supreme Court of India’s observations in 2005, 2011 and 2017, in which it said that if a person was involved in substantive offences he could not be detained under the PSA unless the police had a compelling reason to cite it. Instead, the person should be booked under the ordinary law of the land, the Ranbir Penal Code in Jammu and Kashmir, for instance, which covers criminal offences.