Explorer

Shopian firing: SC restrains cops from taking ‘coercive steps’ against Army officers

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that no coercive step will be taken against Army officers including Major Aditya Kumar accused of allegedly killing three civilians in the Shopian firing case.

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that no coercive step will be taken against Army officers including Major Aditya Kumar, accused of allegedly killing three civilians in the Shopian firing incident in south Kashmir. Jammu and Kashmir police had in an FIR named Army personnel including Major Aditya Kumar for allegedly killing three civilians in firing to disperse a stone-pelting mob in Shopian district on January 27. A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud directed that no coercive action would be taken against the Army officials. The bench also sought the response from the Centre and the Jammu and Kashmir's Mehbooba Mufti government. The FIR was registered under sections 302 (murder) and 307 (attempt to murder) of the Ranbir Penal Code, a criminal code applicable in Jammu and Kashmir. The father of the accused Major Kumar, Lt. Col. Karamveer Singh, moved the apex court seeking quashing of the FIR. The top court had on February 9 agreed to hear the plea. Karamveer Singh said that registration of FIR and the consequent proceedings would adversely impact the morale of the armed forces fighting militancy in Jammu and Kashmir. The father said in his plea that his son's intention was to save Army personnel and property and the fire was inflicted "only to impair and provide a safe escape from a savage and violent mob engaged in terrorist activity". "The manner in which the lodging of the FIR has been portrayed and projected by the political leadership and administrative higher-ups of the state, reflects the extremely hostile atmosphere in the state," the petition said. "In these circumstances, the petitioner is left with no other viable option but to approach this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for protection of valuable Fundamental Rights of his son and himself, enshrined under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India," the plea said. It said that Major Aditya Kumar was wrongly and arbitrarily named as the incident relates to an Army convoy on bonafide military duty in an area under AFSPA (Armed Forces Special Powers Act), which was isolated by an "unruly and deranged" stone-pelting mob.
View More
Advertisement
Advertisement
25°C
New Delhi
Rain: 100mm
Humidity: 97%
Wind: WNW 47km/h
See Today's Weather
powered by
Accu Weather
Advertisement

Top Headline

PM Modi Holds Telephone Conversation With Italian Counterpart Meloni, Extends Greetings On Liberation Day
PM Modi Holds Phone Call With Italian Counterpart Meloni, Extends Greetings On Liberation Day
One-Third Of India Never Votes — Why Turnout Varies From Over 80% In Bengal To Under 60% In UP
One-Third Of India Never Votes — Why Turnout Varies From Over 80% In Bengal To Under 60% In UP
'We Are All Judged By What We Do At Home': MEA Responds To Pro-Palestine Protests At US Varsities
'We Are All Judged By What We Do At Home': MEA Responds To Pro-Palestine Protests At US Varsities
India Delivers BrahMos To Manila. But Nothing Changes For New Delhi In Indo-Pacific Vis-à-vis China
India Delivers BrahMos To Manila. But Nothing Changes For New Delhi In Indo-Pacific Vis-à-vis China
Advertisement
for smartphones
and tablets

Videos

Lok Sabha Elections: Why mention Mangalsutra after the first phase of elections, what is BJP's plan?2nd Phase Voting 2024: Voting on 13 seats in Rajasthan on April 26th. Whose fate is at stake?Independent candidates have disrupted sleep: Pawan Singh | Manish Kashyap | Ravindra Bhati | Anand MishraSalman Khan Attack: Salman Khan is in Dubai, who is Salman Khan's new Pakistani friend?

Photogallery

Embed widget