IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

WRIT PETITION (CRL) 181 OF 2013

ANHAD ….Petitioner

Versus

State of UP & Anr. ….Respondents

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE

PETITIONER (ANHAD)

1. This Writ Petition by the NGO ANHAD was filed on the

basis of a fact finding done titled “Evil Stalks the Land”

dated 24.9.13 after a large team of journalists, social

activists, lawyers, law students, film makers and NGOs

visited the riot affected districts of Muzaffarnagar, Shamli,

Meerut, Saharanpur and met the victims in camps and

video recorded the stories told to them by the victims.

2. In this report extensive details are given of the individuals

and parties those were involved in the riots. The members

of the fact-finding have also given full details of the

conditions of the Jamia Arabia Zainatul Islam Camp,

Rashid Ali Gate, Loni, the Kandhla Idgah Camp, Kandla,

Ismail Colony Camp, Mustafabad Camp, Bijli Ghar Camp,

Shamli, Danga Pidit Rahat Shivir, Jola, Shamli Camp,

Malakhpura, Khurman Road Camp, Kairana, Loi Camp.

3. All the persons from these camps in the interview spoke of

the shortage of ration, lack of medicines and doctors,

unhygienic conditions, lack of toilets, people falling sick

due to the unhygienic conditions, pregnant women

delivering babies in very dirty conditions because the

government hospitals were not treating patients, lack of

security, shortage of tents, no education facilities for the

children, lack of employees to clean the camp, lack of

ambulances, no wood for fuel, no utensils, shortage of

milk, shortage of blankets, children dying due to snake

bites and so on.

4. From page 182 onwards of the petition, the petitioner

has given specific details of those who led the riots,

instigated the mobs and indulged in hate speech. At page

182 the names of Hukkum Singh, Suresh Rana and

Bhartendu are specifically given as the leaders of the mob.

It was submitted that these persons were arrested and

immediately let off on bail. No specific denial has been

made on affidavit by the state of UP. The names of these

persons are again mentioned along with other leaders at

page 183 onwards. It was submitted that these persons

mentioned as leaders of the mob uttered vile anti Muslim

slogans and yet they are all roaming free today.

5. Specific details regarding the identity of the

assailants are recorded on the basis of recorded

testimonies of the victim families. These testimonies

are to be found at page 205 onwards where the victim

families speak of rape, murder, arson and looting and so

on and they specifically identify the assailants and it was

specifically submitted that the persons cited as assailants

are roaming free in the villages. The affidavit in reply

filed by the state of UP did not traverse any of the

specific allegations made in this petition. From page

222 onwards the list of the killed and injured are set out.

From page 224 onwards the names of the assailants and

leaders of the mob are set out together with the slogans

that they shouted. It is repeated at page 228 as under:

“6. Most of the registered FIRs are by names

but still most of the accused are roaming free.

7. Ajit Pradhan of village Lisad was moving

with the Police though he has been named in

approximately 20 FIRs.

Sr.No Name of accused persons Petition page

No.

1. Umesh Naik 180

2. Sanjeev Balyan 180

3. Hukum Singh 181

4. Suresh Rana 181

5. Bhartendu 182, 183

6. Umesh Mallik 183

7. Sanjeev Balyan 184

8. Vinod Paramukh 184

9. Baba Harkishan 185, 210

10. Baba Sitaram 185

11. Vijendra 185

12. Quadir Rana 185

13. Rashid Siddiqui 185

14. Mursalin 185

15. Shahindul Azam 185

16. Maulana Nazeer 185

17. Pradhan Ajit (alias Kalia) 206, 208

18. Hari Kishan Pradhan 208

19. Bhola son of Krishpal 208

20. Sompal 208

21. Dev Singh 208

22. Rampal 208

23. Madan 208

24. Ankit (son of Madan) 208

25. Rajender (son of Harikishan) 209

26. Billu Pradhan 209, 213

27. Kishan (Kerosene Dealer) 210, 215

28. Shravan (Kerosene dealer) 210

29. Sangeet Som 210

30. Pankaj Mallik 210

31. Harender Mallik 210

32. Gajender (son of Hari Kishan) 214

33. Subhash (son of Kishan Chand) 215

34. Sarvan (son of Gian Chand) 215

35. Raju Ankit 215

36. Pawan 216

37. Ajit 216, 228

38. Maharaj Singh (son of Bhim Singh) 220, 225

39. Rajendra Mallik 220

40. Naresh Takait 220

41. 26 assailants name 224

42. 27 assailants name 224

43. Mrs. Ramkali (W/o. Mauseram) From the

“brief note

by state of

UP related to

crime and

action

taken”

44. Mangeran Thambedar Ditto

45. Smt. Ramkali Ditto

46. Pritam Singh Ditto

47. Mangeram Balyan Ditto

48. Naresh Takait Ditto

6. The National Commission for Minorities visited

Muzaffarnagar on 19.9.2013 and made a report which is

annexed at page 111. The report begins with recording the

anti Muslims slogans given by the assailants. At page 119

details are given of the mosques and shops burnt and the

large numbers of people in the camps.

7. The reliefs in this petition are as follows:

a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate

writ, order or direction constituting a Special

Investigating Team of police officers from outside the

state of Uttar Pradesh and headed by E.N.

Rammohan former Director General, BSF to

investigate in respect of the instances of murder,

assault, rape, abductions, arson, looting of

properties, provocative hate speeches , communal

writing in the media and other criminal activity

relating to the riots in and around Muzaffar Nagar,

Shamli, Bhagpat, Meerut, Ghaziabad, Saharanpur

and other affected areas and to prosecute the

offenders in accordance with law.

b) Issue an order requesting the Director, Tata

Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai to send a

team of investigators to the affected areas of

UP to enquire into the conditions of the

victims including missing persons and

thereafter to make a report regarding the true

state of affairs and to suggest a practical and

detailed scheme for the rehabilitation of the

victims of the riots.

c) Issue an order directing reputed organization to

depute a group consisting predominantly of women

teachers and students to visit the affected districts

and interview the women concerned in cases

regarding violence against women and to make a

report to this Court.

d) Issue an order directing the Director AIIMS to

constitute a panel of lady doctors to conduct medical

examination of the victims of sexual assault.

e) Issue an order directing reputed organization to

depute a group to visit the affected areas to make an

inventory of the property of the victims which have

been damaged or destroyed.

f) Issue an order directing the state of UP to forthwith

provide women doctors in the camps and elsewhere

particularly to care for pregnant women and women

with small children.

g) Issue an order directing the state of UP to forthwith

reopen all the Anganwadi centres and to open

additional centres so that the nutrition and education

of little children do not suffer.

h) Issue an order directing the state of UP to ensure

that the education of the children in the riot affected

areas returns to normalcy immediately.

i) Issue an order directing the state of Uttar Pradesh to

forthwith attend to all the grievances regarding

conditions in the camps, non registration of FIRs,

missing persons, food, medical attention, proper

sanitation, adequate tents, drinking water and water

supply, blankets, clothes and other requirements as

set out in the petition.

j) Issue an order directing the Union of India to provide

security at all the camps through the Central Security

Force with immediate effect.

k) Issue an order directing the state of UP to ensure

that all police personnel cooperate in a sympathetic

manner with all the victims of the riots and register

all the FIRs proposed to be filed and thereafter

proceed against persons mentioned in the FIRs

registered with the police by arresting the said

persons.

l) Issue an order directing the State of Uttar Pradesh to

abolish the provision of home posting the police

personnel posted in the vicinity of their homes which

lead to mass mobilization of the local administration

and non cooperative attitude to victims and colluded

with the rioters.

m) Issue an order to the State of Uttar Pradesh to fix

criminal liability and to initiate departmental

proceedings against the police personals found

colluded with the rioters and facilitated in the

commission of large scale arsoning, looting and

murders.

n) Issue an order directing the state of UP to pay

compensation of Rs. 20 lakhs to the families of each

deceased person, Rs. 10 lakhs to the seriously

injured and full and proper compensation for loss of

property including houses, household articles,

vehicles, animals and the like, within one month from

today.

o) Issue an order directing the State government and

the central government to frame a comprehensive

policy of the riot victims who cannot settle back to

their homes, and to provide them status of the

migrants at par with the Kashmir migrants and

thither cases, with all such other benefits at par with

the victims of the riots.

p) Issue an order to the appropriate authority to

provide them voter identity cards and such other

identities and to provide the electoral franchise in the

respective camps or the local area wherever they are

temporarily settled as dislocated citizens.

q) Issue an order to provide specific land denoting as a

temporary measure notifying land for the right

affected victims as a temporary shelter as a

temporary measure.

r) Issue an order or direction to respondent no.2 to

formulate a guideline for the print and electronic

media in terms of reporting during such kind of riots.

s) Issue an order to immediately cancel all the arm

license in the riot affected districts further for an

order for the recovery of all such illegal weapons

which were used to massacre the innocent peoples

such as guns, pistols, swords, trishuls etc.

8. The counter affidavit on behalf of state of UP dated

20.11.13 is at page 435 onwards and does not contradict

any of the specific averments made in the petition.

9. Petitioner then filed a status report dated 12.12.13

providing a list at pages 15 onwards of the persons

including old women and men and young children

dying in the camps. To contradict the statement of the

counsel for the state of UP to the effect that the people

were leaving the camps voluntarily petitioner has annexed

photographs at pages 18 onwards showing that the

people in camps have been forcibly scattered and

rather than returning to their homes are actually in smaller

camps nearby the original camps.

10. In the second counter affidavit of the state of UP filed in

this petition and dated 20.1.14, once again the specific

contents of the writ petition to the effect that the specified

assailants have not been arrested or were immediately

released on bail and are roaming free in the villages have

not been specifically denied.

11. In the “Brief note by State of UP related to crime and

action taken” at page 2 is a “Brief note on action

taken in registered cases by special investigating

cell”. The statistics given therein makes interesting

reading:

a. 566 criminal cases

d. 6656 persons named in the FIRs

e. 541 persons named in the FIRs wrongly

named.

h. and i. 398 persons taken into custody

From the above statistics it can be concluded that

6258 (6656 – 398) genuinely accused persons are

roaming free today. Even if it is accepted that

accused persons are named more than once and

that 3803 persons are genuinely named in the FIRs,

still 3415 (3803 - 398) persons are roaming free

today. Moreover, out of the 398 persons arrested,

state of UP has not disclosed how many have been

released on bail. Thus in respect of the most crucial

information that should have been put on affidavit,

no disclosure has been made.

12. In the Brief Note at page 6, the most important

information is cryptically hidden in the following maner:

“ Action against all persons irrespective of their

political or economic status

Action has been taken against total 22

important persons. Out of which 12 persons

are on bail. ”

13. Continuing with the same “brief note” at page 4 it is may

be noticed that the investigation is currently being done by

54 police personnel with a few officers supervising in

addition. Counsel for the state of UP made a statement

that each investigator is given only 5 cases to do. If the

566 criminal investigations are divided by 5, 133

investigation officers are required as against 54

currently assigned this work.

14. Most important is the enquiry report of the state of UP

at page 72 onwards of this status report wherein

the state of UP has admitted that in case after case,

young children and old persons died due to the cold

and lack of medical attention. This is a tragic

confirmation that the state of UP has completely abdicated

its constitutional duty to take care of the victims of the

riots.

15. In the second status report dated 16.1.14 filed on

behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner put on record the

report of the Asian Human Rights Commission which

put together a team of members from the Peoples Union

for Democratic Rights (PUDR). This team visited the relief

camps 28-30th December 2013. This report gives a tragic

account of the forcible eviction of the riot affected from

the relief camps, apathy in provision of reliefs by

government agencies, the administration not making any

attempts to distribute woolen clothes and blankets for

people living in the camps, the under-reporting of the

number of persons in the relief camps, the non

identification 1800 families as riot affected, the slow

progress of police investigation of complaints related to

murder, rape, arson and looting, the roaming free of

persons named in the FIRs as committing heinous crimes

and so on.

16. From 48 onwards are newspaper reports which on a daily

basis record the indifference of the state of UP and the

suffering of the riot affected persons. Although one does

not usually go by newspaper reports alone, nothing

prevents this Hon’ble Court from taking note of the

very large and consistent media reporting which

confirms that the reports are accurate and made in

public interest in situations where the reporting is

uniform and consistent this Hon’ble Court may take

note of the reporting and act on the same.

17. At page 45 is the report of the Times of India dated

27.12.13 carrying the infamous remark of a minister “no

one dies of the cold”. At page 46 is the report from the

Hindu dated 1.1.14 recording that senior district officials

were “urging” riot affected families to leave the Loi village

camp in the biting cold. At page 64 is the Hindu report

dated 2.1.14 titled “From Displacement to Disappearance”

putting on record officials forcing riot victims to leave the

camps, the pitiable conditions of the pregnant women, the

condition of the children whose education had been

stopped, the bulldozing of the camps that were “forced to

disappear”.

18. At Annexure O at page 64 of the status report is the

Tehelka report and at internal page 33 of the report is the

article titled “the Neros of Uttar Pradesh”.

19. At page 48 and 55 onwards are the affidavits of the

families in the camps stating that were forced to leave the

camps, that no compensation was paid to them and that

the accused persons named in the FIR are still roaming

free.

20. A compliance report with an affidavit dated 20.1.14 has

been filed in this Court by the state of UP. Reading page

134 along with page 137 it becomes clear that there are

566 criminal cases remaining to be investigated.

Page 138 to 142 are the table showing that as against

6403 accused named in the FIRs relating to serious

criminal offences on 295 were arrested. Page 162

read together with page 165 shows that as against 741

accused persons named in the FIRs relating to

murder only 80 were arrested. Similarly, page 166

read together with page 169 shows that as against 513

accused persons named in the FIRs relating to

arson only 83 were arrested. Page 170 read together

with page 173 show that as against 506 accused

persons named in the FIRs relating to grievous

injuries and attempt murder only 51 were arrested.

Page 174 read together with page 177 show that as

against 111 accused persons named in the FIRs

relating to rape and molestation not a single person

was arrested. Similarly, page 178 read together with

page 181 show that as against 4532 accused persons

named in the FIRs only 75 were arrested.

21. In the affidavit dated 16.11.2013 filed by the petitioner,

the petitioner has put on record 151 FIR’s lodged in one

Police Station being Fugana Police Station in District

Muzaffarnagar (Page 8-93), showing that 2200 persons

were named as accused persons and has stated that the

accused are roaming free. Petitioner has further stated

that in Fugana Police Station more than 300 FIR’s have

been lodged and in the whole district about 600 FIR’s have

been lodged and that the situation of the accused roaming

free is true of the all these FIR’s as well.

22. Petitioner has further stated that it was important for the

state to specifically deal with the specifically named

accused to show how many named accused persons were

arrested and how many were released on bail.

23. Petitioner then put on record the report of the Joint

Citizen’s Committee comprising of women rights

activists, health and Medical professionals and lawyers

(Page 99 onwards) the camps they visited are set out at

page 103. The “panic marriages” of women in the camps

is set out. The rape and gang rape FIR’s are set out at

page 104 onwards. It is stated that no arrest have been

made. The health situation is set out at pages 107

onwards.

24. At page 133 the NHRC report set out where the NHRC

visited the area once again on 11.10.2013 and the

comments of the NHRC is as under:

“The team found that the living conditions in almost

all the relief camps were appalling. The displaced

persons were living in make-shifts tents, having no

protection against the vagaries of nature. On 11th

October, 2013, there was rain in the morning and

when the team visited the camps, it found many

tents were water logged. The inmates of the camps

complained of insufficient supply of rations. Many of

them expressed indignation over the partisan

attitude of the police. The medical facilities at the

camps were inadequate. In some camps, the team

found some staff in white aprons but on enquiry

found them to be quite incompetent. The inmates

complained that only 4 or 5 generic medicines had

been provided in the camps and the same medicines

were being given for all sorts of diseases.

The team found CMO, Muzaffarnagar to be highly

irresponsible and unreliable. During interaction

with NGOs, it was reported that 8 persons had died

in Loi camp but the CMO, Muzaffarnagar denied that

there had been any death in the camp. On visiting

the camp, however, the team found that two new

born babies and 5 other inmates had actually died.

Some students also met the team and expressed

concern that due to displacement from their villages

they may not be able to take the Matriculation and

Intermediate examinations conducted by the UP

Board.”

25. During the submissions of the State of UP, this Hon’ble

Court enquired into the reasons for the riots. Petitioners

version is set out in the fact finding report titled “Evil

Stalks the Land” dated 24.9.13 and begins at page 178

onwards under the heading “Nothing Happens Suddenly”

and “Meticulous Planning”. The State has given no reasons

whatsoever apart from stating that certain individual

incidents sparked the riots. It is important for this court to

determine as to whether Muzaffarnagar riots are an

isolated event or part of conspiracy. The cryptic answer

given by the state of UP that the riots were due to a

local incident is farcical! Local incidents may result in a

local riot. Communal violence does not spread for

hundreds of kilometers across districts and result in a large

number of deaths and serious injuries and destruction of

property unless the underground organizing of communal

groups have previously prepared the ground for the

massacre.

26. The need for an independent investigation is not

merely to apprehend the accused persons. The

reason is wider. It is to uncover the conspiracy of

communal parties and groups and high profile

communally minded individuals who operate behind

the scene creating havoc in state after state thus

destroying the secular fabric of Indian democracy.

This is the main reason why an independent

criminal investigation is necessary to put behind

bars the ring leaders and the main conspirators

instead of merely catching the foot soldiers.

27. For too long communal minded criminals belonging to

certain political parties have spread hatred in the country

moving from state to state fermenting trouble, setting up

arsenals and precipitating riots. The legal system in

India has proved itself to be unequal to the task of

prosecuting and convicting such criminals mainly

because they receive the backing of the party in

power as well as the police. This is true from the 1984

Sikh riots in Delhi, to the 1992 Bombay riots (where Justice

Shreekrishna heading a Commission of Enquiry found the

political parties in power and the Maharashtra police

complicit in the massacre that took place), to the 2002

Gujarat riots (where a Commission of Enquiry is now in its

13th year), to the 2007 Khandamal riots (where two

Commissions of Enquiries are yet to submit their reports),

and finally to the Muzaffarnagar riots. The only way in

which this Hon’ble Court may make a break with

the past to ensure that communal minded

individuals and political parties are instilled with

the fear of god is if an independent criminal

investigation is ordered and an independent social

work institution enquires into the rehabilitation

aspect and makes a report. Only when two

independent reports are made will the

government’s falsehoods be exposed and relief

granted accordingly by this Court. This Hon’ble

Court may therefore create a new trend entirely for

communal riot cases which may be followed by

courts hereinafter to ensure that independent

assessments and prosecutions are done.

28. The group of ministers of the UP government has also

made a report and which has been filed in this Hon’ble

Court and the relevant parts of which are as under:

“The figures given in the above table are

wrong. The victims are staying in the Madarsas at

many places such as Malakpur and Kandhla, Kairana

town under Tahsil Kairana of district Shamli. In

absence of Government relief and when the private

sources also dried up then the season of rains and

cold started, the social workers made arrangements

of houses on rental basis with the help of own

contributions and many of the persons have given

shelter to the victims in their vacant premises. Many

of the victims have gone to Delhi and Punjab state in

search of bread had employment but have not

returned to their villages. The full particulars of

Kairana Tahsil are not included in the report of the

Ministers. In the said report it is stated at page 3

that the moveable properties of total 382 persons

were assessed in their presence. It is also stated in

their report that the property of total 104 persons

was assessed in their presence. This proves that only

382 and 104 victims were found who have assist

their losses in their presence. The question is why

the assessment of properties of the 23427 persons

from Muzaffarnagar and of 1073 persons of Shamli

1656 persons of Badaut who have returned to their

houses, was not carried out in their presence. How

can it be said that the person has returned back to

his house when his losses are not assessed in his

presence. It is accepted in the said report that the

people are not returning to their villages due to fear

and it is also stated that the displaced persons are

apprehending that if they returned to their villages,

the persons against home they have filed cases may

bring pressure on them and settled cases.

29. Counsel for the state of UP has argued that the closure of

the camps and the return of 41,000 persons out of 47,000

persons is a sign of the marvelous work done by the state

administration. He has further argued that since both

communities are unhappy with the investigation being

done that is the best sign of the fact that the investigation

is being done impartially. In respect of the return of

41,000 persons reference may be had to the letter dated

12.9.13 (at Annexure A/2 page 34 of the Compliance

Report by the State of Uttar Pradesh, dated 16.9.13 in Writ

Petition (Crl.) 155 of 2013 with 158 of 2013) of the

Commissioner Sharanpur division wherein he has admitted

that 41,603 persons in Muzaffarnagar and Shamli

alone had “left their houses and taken refuge in

other places due to the communal incidents”.

30. The Commissioner then wrote letter dated 25.10.13

(submitted to this Hon’ble Court by the counsel for the

state of UP) wherein he has stated as under:

“In certain villages of both the districts, the

villages had witnessed such gruesome incidents

in the violence took place on and after

07.09.13, in which , their family members and

their known people were brutally murdered and

their houses were put on fire and caused

pecuniary loss to the movable and immovable

properties. Resultantly the people of these

villages are not ready to return back to their

respective villages in any condition. During the

attempts made by the public representatives

for sending the displaced families to their

villages they have clearly said that they will

reside anywhere but they won’t go to their

villages. These families are also apprehending

that due to the FIRs lodged by them, they

would be under immense pressure for

withdrawal of their cases and the incident can

be repeated. District Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar

vide his letter no. 2732/SA.DAN./J.A dated

25.10.13 and District Magistrate, Shamli vide

his letter no 1625/J.A dated 25.10.13 have

provided the details of such villages. After

collecting the details from both the districts the

same are being produced on Annexure-1.”

31. The submission made across the Bar that most of the

victim families are landless labourers is farcical and

completely contrary to the record and is based on no

pleading at all. On the contrary, in the Commissioner’s

letter abovementioned at Annexure 1 onwards (page 6

onwards) in all the villages the damage to immoveable

property is set out:

Village Immoveable property destroyed

Phugana 51

Kutba 25

Kutbi 11

Mohammadpur

Raising

33

Kakda 15

Mundbhar 9

Lisadh 112

Lank 25

bhawadi 48

32. No explanation is given as to why only 9 villages in

Muzaffarnagar and Shamli districts are covered by the

compensation schemes. Reports 1 to 11 of the state of UP

only deal with these two districts. The latest “Compliance

Report of the State of Uttar Pradesh” dated 20.1.14 in WP

(Crl.) 155 of 2013 records at page 162 onwards that one

person died in Meerut and 2 persons each at Bhagpat and

Sharanpur.

33. No explanation is given as to why Rs. 15 lakhs was paid

by the state of Uttar Pradesh alone to the IBN journalist

who was killed (7th Report page 7) and Rs. 10 lakhs to

others. The answer of the state of UP that they are now

willing to pay Rs. 13 lakhs each and that Rs. 2 lakhs will

come from the central government is not a satisfactory

answer since in the case of the reporter Rs. 15 lakhs was

paid by the state of UP itself and an additional Rs. 2 lakhs

is payable by the central government making a total of Rs.

17 lakhs.

34. To tell such persons that they will get Rs. 5 lakhs to

relocate on their own somewhere else and not return to

their homes (else they would have to repay the Rs. 5

lakhs) is injustice of the most severe kind not

expected from the administration of the largest state in the

country. First of all there is no reason why the actual loss

of moveable and immoveable property not be computed in

the presence of the victim families is not computed and full

compensation granted. Secondly, the state is duty bound

to in addition to the compensation paid for loss of

property, also pay for the rehabilitation of the displaced

families. A sum of Rs. 5 lakhs for rehabilitation of an entire

family is a pittance. Many families are buying small plots

of lands near the relief camps that have been forcibly

closed paying about Rs. 3 lakhs for the plots of lands

leaving very little for food and subsistence, medical

expenses, education of the children and purchase

household articles to replace those that were destroyed. If

rehabilitation is meant to place the family in a better

position than they were before the riots took place then

the more appropriate figure would be Rs. 20 lakhs. This

Court may adopt a modern and trendsetting standard

of compensation, where payment of Rs. 20 lakhs per

displaced family is granted so that the compensation

amounts are compatible with the globalised standards that

India is so proud of and commensurate with sky rocketing

prices in food, medical attention, housing, education and

other requirements. Even the compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs

for a person murdered in a communal riot relates to a

standard of the 1980’s where for a death in custody such

compensation was paid. Why should these pre-

globalisation levels of compensation prevail today? Why

should the state not pay each family where a family

member was killed Rs. 1 crore? If the deaths are

approximately 135 is the compensation burden of Rs. 135

crores onerous at all?

35. Why was compensation not paid for the old persons

and babies and others who died in the relief camps?

Should they also not be compensated in the same way as

the victim families? Why should any distinction be drawn in

respect of the age of the persons who died in camps?

36. All in all the attitude of the state of UP clearly indicates

that the enormity of the crime committed, the concomitant

responsibility of the state apparatus and the humbleness

and contriteness with which the state was expected to

approach the issues of criminal accountability and

rehabilitation is sorely missing even now despite the

widespread condemnation in the Indian media. Only a

stinging indictment by this Hon’ble Court will shake

this government out of its uncaring attitude and lay

a jurisprudential trend for the future.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Original Jurisdiction

(UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)

Writ Petition (CRL.) 181 OF 2013

In the matter of:

ANHAD …Petitioner

Versus

State of U.P & Another …Respondents

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE

PETITIONER (ANHAD)

Advocate for the Petitioner M/s Jyoti Mendiratta