sarblohsingh2004

You guys are Brill !! Got another Shabad to find, Shabad Starts : Bandna Har Bandna Gun Gavo Gopal Rai Guru Jee and Sangat Jee again forgive for mistakes in writing romanised Thanks

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! Sangat Jee, Please can you help I am looking for a Shabad, I cannot search for it properly on Sikhi to the Max as cannot write Gurmukhi that well The Last Pangatee romanised of Shabad ends: Abnasi kem Sukh Chahe Je Nanak, Sada Simar Narain I think there is a mistake in that aswell. Guru Jee and Sangat Jee forgive me for mistakes

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! Vaheguru

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! It is also 20th Anniversary of Sarbat Khalsa 1986 when Khalsa Panth - Declaration of Khalistan.

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! Veer UntitledSingh, Guru Jee has blessed you with Amrit, Guru Jee made you Amritdhari...... you are on the path and you will go through highs and lows....... the main thing is to be sincere and do Ardaas, tell Guru Jee your worries and ask Guru Jee for help and then be sincere. Highs and Lows are part of life and being on the path. Also think about and read about the sacrifices that have been made for Sikhi, that will surely help. Sorry if this moorakh has said anything wrong. Bhul Chuk Maaf Karna

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! Anyone went to Sikh Film Festival??....there is one on Tonight (09 Oct) at 8.30pm http://www.phoenix.org.uk/season_diary.asp?SeasonID=78

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentSe...tacodalogin=yes Sep. 23, 2005. 01:00 AM Inquiry finds Indian troops did killings Pakistan militants falsely blamed Cover-up included false DNA tests SHAIKH AZIZUR RAHMAN SPECIAL TO THE STAR New Delhi—Troops hunting terrorists killed and buried Indian civilians and passed them off as Pakistani militants responsible for killing Sikhs in Kashmir, an inquiry by India's top investigating agency has revealed. When villagers' protests led to the bodies being exhumed, the army doctored DNA tests to show that the remains were those of militants from across the border, India's Central Bureau of Investigation said in its final report two weeks ago. Human rights groups frequently report abuses by security forces in the Himalayan territory claimed by both India and Pakistan. But this was the first case of its kind handed over to the agency for investigation. The bureau found four army officers guilty of killing the civilians. Hours before then-U.S. president Bill Clinton visited India in March 2000, 35 Sikhs were killed in Chattisinghpura village in Kashmir by suspected Islamic militants in army uniforms. India blamed Pakistan-based terrorists for the attack. Four days later, 17 Muslim residents from three neighbouring villages disappeared. Simultaneously, reports emerged that five Pakistani terrorists involved in the massacre of the Chattisinghpura Sikhs had been killed by the army. Juma Khan, a 45 year old from Brari Angan, was among the villagers picked up without explanation by the soldiers. "I thought they would not harm him because he was a family man and was not involved in anything," Khan's wife, Roshan Jan, said recently. Two days after Khan's arrest, the army said its sharpshooters had shot dead five "foreign militants" during a "ferocious encounter." There were no autopsies before the bodies were buried, but locals determined from clothing and personal items recovered at the gravesites that the bodies were those of missing villagers. As violent protests raged around Kashmir, local officials ordered exhumations. Although the bodies were charred, the army fatigues in which they were clothed were mysteriously intact. Relatives of a local cattle trader said his body was headless. There were no bullet wounds in another corpse. The chopped-off nose and chin of a shepherd was discovered in a grave holding another body. Farooq Abdullah, then chief minister of the state, ordered DNA tests to determine identities. But that plan came under a cloud when two forensic laboratories said DNA samples from relatives of the dead men had been tampered with. "In one case, blood samples were said to belong to the mother and daughter of one victim. But not only were the samples male in origin, both belonged to the same man," a senior scientist at Calcutta's Central Forensic Science Laboratory told investigators. In three cases, samples allegedly collected from female relatives were found to have come from men. Another woman's sample contained the DNA of two individuals. Two doctors involved in collecting the samples were suspended by the government, and a new team, headed by a senior police officer, collected fresh blood samples in April 2002. The new DNA tests established the dead men were "not foreign terrorists, as contended by the forces, but innocent civilians," a CBI investigator said this week. The agency concluded the doctors, under pressure from the army, had tampered with the first DNA tests. "We have irrefutable evidence of at least seven such fake encounters, where Indian security forces killed 13 innocent Indian villagers in the last five years and passed them off as Pakistani militants," said Pervez Imroz, a human rights lawyer who spearheads the Association of the Parents of Disappeared Persons. "However, since 1989 more than 8,000 Kashmiris have disappeared from the custody of the security forces and we know nothing of their whereabouts."

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.tribuneindia.com/2005/20050923/cth2.htm#8 Attack on ex-SSP: charges to be framed on Sept 29 Tribune News Service Chandigarh, September 22 District and Sessions Judge M.M.S. Bedi today fixed September 29 as the date for the framing of charges in a case relating to the attack on former Chandigarh SSP Sumedh Singh Saini, involving Khalistan Liberation Force(KLF) militant, Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar. Bhullar, who has been exempted from personal appearance, is currently lodged in Tihar Jail, New Delhi. He has been awarded death penalty by the Supreme Court in a case related to an attack on former Indian Youth Congress chief M.S. Bitta. Bhullar had alleged here on January 18 that the Delhi police had forced him to own responsibility for the attack on Mr Bitta outside the IYC office in New Delhi on September 11,1993. The confession was later used to build a “fabricated” case against him in a TADA court, Bhullar had alleged.

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.sikhsangat.org/publish/article_441.shtml School orders to surrender kara & kirpan By Tribune India Sep 26, 2005, 20:48 Sikh students have been banned to wear kirpan and kara in Shiwalik Public School run by the district administration in Ropar city. The school Principal, in her written orders, a copy of which is also available with The Tribune, said the students were not permitted to wear any such objects that may be sharp, including heavy karas and kirpans. The orders were sent to the parents of each student in the school. The order said these things were strictly prohibited in the school. If any student was found wearing them, these would be impounded and the bearer would be fined Rs 500 besides disciplinary action. Besides the kirpan and kara, other things which were banned, included mobile phone, gold and silver jewellery, cash, CDs and cassettes and also in driving to school on two-wheelers. The SGPC has decided to launch an agitation against the decision of the school authorities. An SGPC member, Mr Gurinder Singh Gogi, said if the administration would not withdraw the circular issued by the school authorities, then the SGPC would launch a statewide agitation against it, he added. It was unfortunate the students of Punjab had to face such kind of discriminations. The decision of the school authorities met with widespread resentment among parents of the Sikh students. On conditions of the anonymity they said that kara and kirpan were compulsory for a baptised Sikh. It was unfortunate the school run by the administration was hurting sentiments of Sikhs. They also decided to take up matter with the higher authorities. When contacted the Principal of school, Ms Gurpreet Mathur, said that order was passed due to the safety of the students and not to hurt sentiments of Sikh community. As even in small dispute, the students could hurt each other with a kara and kirpan. She said tomorrow she would take necessary amendments in the order so that baptised Sikh students could carry things as per their religious beliefs.

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! Anyone got this book: http://66.221.45.104/index.asp?c2=/book_release.asp Genesis of State Terrorism in Punjab Arunjeev Singh Walia and Tejinder Singh Sudan Published by Lawyers for Human Rights International(Chandigarh - India) From Foreword "There is no rule of law in Punjab. Thousands of innocent young Sikhs have been extra-judicially executed since June 1984. The uniformed brutality reached the saturation point in the last decade of the 20th century..... In my view, if the High Court had excercised its power under the Constitution in those days, there could have been no violation of human rights or atleast violators would have been punished. In those dark days even five lawyers lost their life at the hands of brutal police force, one former head priest of Akal Takhat, Bhai Gurdev Singh Kaunke was torutred to death. The authors have mentioned some cases in which even the High Court did not intervene and failed to take appropriate action...... It was the saddest day in the history of India when after the assassination of Indira gandhi, the then Prime minister of India, thousands of Sikhs were killed, girls raped on the roads of Delhi and other parts of the country where Congress government was in power. But neither the supreme court nor any High Court took any action to stop the carnage and genocide of Sikhs..... In fact Punjab is still a police state and justice is denied to the victims. In this small state, there is more police now than in the whole of British India before 1947.... Justice Ajit Singh Bains (Retd.) - May 2001

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.oxfordstudent.com/tt2004wk4/new...39;_controversy Hindu Society in 'militant fundamentalist' controversy By Matt Trueman Oxford University Hindu Society (HUM) was dramatically forced to drop a charity that was set to benefit from its 'Mumbai Rouge' fundraising event, after alleged links with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a militant Hindu fundamentalist group, came to light. The event, billed as an "elegant evening of dance, song and fashion", had been due to split proceedings between the British Heart Foundation and SEWA International, the latter of which describes itself as "dedicated to the cause of Humanity". However, just two hours before the event was due to begin, associates of St Hilda's College, where it was to be held, coerced the organisers into ditching SEWA International. This resulted from the receipt of what HUM described as "hate mail", in the wake of a report detailing its contentious connections. The report, first made public in the House of Lords by AWAAZ - South Asia Watch - associates HSS UK, the funding arm of which is SEWA International, with the RSS. It states both are "UK branches of the Indian RSS family, dedicated to promoting the RSS and its ideology," whose "primary aim... is to create physical and ideological training cells" in the UK, with a "reported 72 training cells" currently in practice. Suresh Grover, president of AWAAZ, described his organisation as "the first permanent structure to look at fundamentalism in South Asia", "secular" and consisting of "academics, lawyers and students". The RSS, formed in the 1920s, is an all-male group dedicated to turning India into an exclusively Hindu state. It has been banned three times in India, twice for its role in fomenting religious hatred and serious anti-minority violence, and is thought to have played a large part in the 2002 Gujarat mob killing of 2,000, mostly Muslims. Mahatma Gandhi's assassin was also once an "activist" in the organisation. Despite the report's existence for almost three months, and an ongoing investigation launched by the Charities Commission in November 2002 following "allegations... that the charity was supporting militant organisations in India," HUM committee members Chirag Sanghrajka and Praajakta Thackare told The OxStu that the accusations were "not really [considered by the committee as a whole] before the event". They said that HUM is "affiliated to the National Hindu Students Forum and chose SEWA International purely because it is the national charity they support." A spokesman for HSS UK dismissed the AWAAZ report as "all anti-Hindu propaganda." Shantilal Mistry, chair of SEWA International, said: "We're not that kind of secret organisation, sponsoring fundamentalism. We openly invite donors to come and see the work that is being done. We're not involved in any kind of politics or discrimination." HUM, which similarly "does not affiliate itself, nor promote the agenda of any political party", was described by its Secretary, Praajakta Thackare, as a "very small religious, cultural and social society". However, Grover told The OxStu, "There are members of Oxford Hindu Society that are members of the HSS both in this country and in India", although HUM itself denies any of the committee are members. 'Mumbai Rouge' consisted of "music, catwalks and a variety show" and drew "expected numbers of about 100", each paying £8-9. Sanghrajka described it as "really good fun". However, some students who attended the gala took a dim view of the original support of SEWA International. Gemma Avey, a first year Modern Languages student, told The OxStu: "I probably wouldn't have wanted to pay £9 to it, but, then again, I only went to support a friend." Peter's student William Pearce stated that he "certainly would have had second thoughts", and expressed some disappointment at the seeming "lack of research". While Oxford's HUM, which had "never given money to SEWA International", has "not been banned" from supporting the group, Sanghrajka said: "I don't know if we will be supporting them again." Shantilal Mistry of SEWA International, stated he had "nothing to say as it's their decision. Manchester Student Union has just raised some money for us. We don't influence anyone and have nothing to hide."

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.tribuneindia.com/2005/20050908/main1.htm I wonder if they discussed STATE TERRORISM ?? What about Murderers Sajjan Kumar , Jagdish Tytler which are part of manmohans government ?? and the rest of the police and mp's that took part in killing thousands of innocent Sikhs ? India, EU to intensify fight against terror Tony Blair’s Shimla visit cancelled Rajeev Sharma Tribune News Service New Delhi, September 7 India and the European Union, holding their sixth annual summit here, today agreed to intensify their cooperation in the fight against terrorism and signed a “framework agreement” on Indian participation in Galileo, though the signing of the formal agreement had to be deferred because of unresolved differences. British Prime Minister and the current EU Chairman Tony Blair, who was to hold a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Mashobra, near Shimla, tomorrow, has cancelled his Shimla visit because of bad weather and will hold this bilateral meeting in Udaipur, sources said. Differences continued between India and EU on Indian participation in Galileo, the EU’s Global Navigation Satellite System worth 3.4 billion Euros but the fact that the two sides today signed the Framework Agreement on India’s participation in the project conveyed that the differences were not irreconcilable. The Tribune understands that India is willing to pay $ 300 million as its equity for the Galileo project and wants for itself certain applications which have dual use. The EU wants to make sure that these areas of dual application are reserved for Europeans only. Prime Minister Tony Blair, President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso, Secretary-General and High Representative Xavier Solana, EU External Relations Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner and EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson represented the EU at the summit. On the question of terrorism, India came up with some “ambitious” suggestions, as Prime Minister Blair himself put it in his joint Press conference with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Hyderabad House. Mr Blair said: “The problem with terrorism is not just the people that commit the act of terrorism; it is those that support it, those that incite it, those that encouraged it. I think we have got to take a very strong stand on behalf of the international community and say we condemn this and we condemn it utterly...It is time we sent out a clear, unified message from the international community and said that it is no longer legitimate not merely in terms of committing acts of terrorism but in terms of supporting or inciting it.” He said this can be done by making sure that there is proper intelligence cooperation, that Europol and the Central Bureau of Investigation cooperate properly together and areas of practical cooperation like attacking sources of money laundering and financing of terrorism are effectively addressed. “The proposals from the Indian side are actually rightly ambitious in this regard. But these terrorists cross frontiers very easily and they do get access to funds as well as weapons and it is important that we are tackling every single aspect of this. So, I think that cooperation is important. But there is another area of cooperation as well which is also to talk about how we defeat the ideas and ideologies of these people.” Prime Minister Manmohan Singh identified the adoption of a Joint Action Plan as the most important outcome of the summit. He said JAP would be the roadmap for identifying pathways to future cooperation, “an ambitious and unique document, the first such detailed action plan that we have drawn up.” The Action Plan also covers several other areas on which the two sides are committed to work: Climate change, science and technology, research and development, enhanced parliamentary exchanges, greater people-to-people contact and dialogue related to migration and consular issues. Dr Manmohan Singh said the political declaration on the India-EU strategic partnership summed up the salient features of what the two wished to achieve together and added that at the top of the agenda was intensified political dialogue and cooperation for meeting common challenges and global threats, starting with terrorism. “We have agreed that there is no place for terrorism in the civilised world and that we will work together towards fighting it. We have agreed on a detailed framework indicating how we will enhance our cooperation in this very important area... We will also establish a security dialogue on global and regional security issues, disarmament and nonproliferation.” On India’s quest for permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council, Dr Manmohan Singh said some countries’ opposition to the G4 Resolution does not necessarily imply opposition to India’s place on the expanded Security Council. “We have not given up and I sincerely hope that we can still sort out this issue.” The Prime Minister also announced that India had today cleared the purchase of 43 Airbus aircraft for Indian Airlines which are going to cost $ 2.2 billion. The Prime Minister made a specific reference to one of the irritants with the EU when he said New Delhi had urged the EU to revisit and review technology export control regimes that create a restrictive environment for technology transfers to India. “India’s impeccable record in the area of nonproliferation is well known and we hope that the EU will respond positively. “The European Union welcomed the Indian participation in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. The Prime Minister thanked the EU for the Erasmus Mundus scholarship programme that has allocated 33 million Euros for students from India to study in the European Union. European Commission President said the inclusion of India in the Galileo programme, and also the support that European Union promised to India as member of the ITER as two main aspects of “a very successful summit”.

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../08/ixhome.html Liberty and security in the balance By Joshua Rozenburg (Filed: 08/09/2005) We are not trying to browbeat the judges, the Lord Chancellor told me yesterday. Really? Why, then, did the Home Secretary urge the courts to respect "memoranda of understanding" with countries to which Britain wants to deport foreign terrorist suspects? As the Prime Minister said on Monday: "There's a major question as to whether, on the basis of understandings with countries to which we want to return these people, we will be able to within the courts." Karamjit Singh Chahal and family after his release from prison What is the Government doing if not trying to suggest that the courts are soft on suspected terrorists and - as a result - jeopardising the safety of people in Britain? "We are not seeking a confrontation with the judiciary," Lord Falconer insisted. "They would have no difficulty with any legislation we might pass." But what has not yet been decided is whether the Government will introduce legislation next month to ensure that foreign terrorist suspects cannot remain in Britain indefinitely. To understand the problem, we have to go back to the 1990s, and a man called Karamjit Singh Chahal. Mr Chahal, 57, came to Britain illegally in 1971 in search of work and was allowed to stay in 1974, after an amnesty. Some 10 years later, he travelled to the Punjab, where he attended the Golden Temple in Amritsar, the holiest Sikh shrine, and met Sant Bhindranwale, a campaigner for an independent Sikh homeland. The situation there deteriorated after the killing of a senior police officer at the Golden Temple in 1983. In June 1984, the Indian army stormed the temple during a religious festival, killing Bhindranwale and around 1,000 other Sikhs. Before that, however, Mr Chahal had been detained by the Pubjab police and held for three weeks. He said he was beaten unconscious, tortured with electrodes and subjected to a mock execution. On his return to Britain, Mr Chahal led protests against the Indian government's actions. At one time, he was detained under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and, on another occasion, he was convicted of affray - though his convictions were quashed for unfairness. In 1990, Douglas Hurd, as home secretary, decided that Mr Chahal should be deported because his presence was not conducive to the public good. Mr Chahal challenged the deportation in the courts, spending six years in detention before the European Court of Human Rights ordered his release. He is now understood to be living quietly in Britain. His main complaint in Strasbourg was that, by deporting him to India, the Government would breach Article 3 of the Human Rights Convention. That says: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment." There was no suggestion that Mr Chahal would be tortured in Britain, of course. But a case called Soering established in 1989 that a person could not be extradited if there were grounds for believing that he faced a real risk of inhuman treatment. Before Mr Chahal's case reached Strasbourg, the Court of Appeal had decided that the home secretary was entitled to balance the risks to Britain of allowing an individual to stay against the risks to the individual if he were expelled. Giving judgment in 1993, Lord Justice Nolan said: "There may be occasions when the individual poses such a threat to this country and its inhabitants that considerations of his personal safety and well-being become virtually irrelevant. Nonetheless, one would expect that the secretary of state would balance the risks to this country against the risks to the individual, albeit that the scales might properly be weighted in favour of the former." Unfortunately, the previous government did not quit while it was ahead. Instead of reaching a "friendly settlement" with Mr Chahal, and allowing him to remain in Britain subject to any restrictions that he might have accepted, the Home Office decided to defend the ruling in Strasbourg - without success. In Soering, the Human Rights judges had recognised the potential danger to states if they were prevented from returning suspects to countries that wanted to put them on trial. But, by a majority of 12 votes to seven, the judges in Chahal said that this did not mean that there was "any room for balancing the risk of ill-treatment against the reasons for expulsion in determining whether a state's responsibility under Article 3 is engaged". That ruling is what apparently stops the Government expelling suspected foreign terrorists from Britain. A clever lawyer might argue that the Chahal judgment could be "distinguished" on its facts - in other words, that it applies only to cases where there is clear evidence that the suspect would face ill-treatment if deported. But that is not the advice that ministers have been given. Lord Falconer said yesterday that the Government agreed with the Court of Appeal: in deciding whether a foreign national should be deported, the Home Secretary should balance the threat to national security against the risk to the individual. Under the Human Rights Act, however, British courts must "take into account" rulings such as Chahal. One option would be to announce that a suspect is to be deported, then wait for him to seek judicial review and then argue that the seven dissenting judges in Chahal were right when they said that a country "may legitimately strike a fair balance between, on the one hand, the nature of the threat to its national security interests if the person concerned were to remain and, on the other, the extent of the potential risk of ill-treatment of that person in the state of destination". But if that argument were defeated, the suspect could remain here indefinitely and the Government would have no right of appeal to Strasbourg: only individuals can bring human rights cases, not states. Passing new legislation would therefore allow a "quicker" hearing in Strasbourg, Lord Falconer explained. A terror suspect could challenge the legislation and the Government would argue that Chahal should be reinterpreted because of changed circumstances. Even so, Chahal might eventually be upheld. Then the Government would simply have to find a way to implement Strasbourg's ruling. Lord Falconer made it plain there would be no alternative at this point: "We have no desire to leave the Human Rights Convention," he told me. In practice, when weighing the interests of the state against those of a suspected terrorist, the balance will almost always come down in favour of the state - if only because more people's lives would be at risk if he remained. Nevertheless, the Government's approach has the merits of pragmatism. Ministers should get on with their Bill, publishing it in draft this month, and stop shouting at the judges.

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.torturecare.org.uk/index.php?mo...ptid=13&aid=286 Lives under threat Second Edition Lives Under Threat looks at the persecution of Sikhs in India, specifically through studies of Sikh clients of the Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture. Using India as an example, the report examines the British Government's asylum policy. Introduction to the first edition (October 1996) Although the Punjab is not the only area of India experiencing unrest, it is this province, with its large Sikh population, which most often comes to the attention of people in the UK. This unrest has caused death or "disappearance" of many thousands of Sikhs and made thousands of others flee their homes and villages in fear for their lives, becoming internal refugees. A tiny minority of these manage to escape to the UK to seek asylum, but are finding it increasingly difficult to persuade the authorities that they are genuine political refugees under the terms of the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. The Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture is concerned about asylum determination procedures because over 95% of its clients are asylum seekers andrefugees. These procedures can have a potentially damaging effect on the well-being of its clients and deprive them of the treatment they need. The first need of anybody fleeing torture is to know that they have reached safety. In practice, however, our clients often suffer acute and prolonged anxiety about the uncertain outcome of their asylum applications. Many feel that their account of their experiences is not believed by the authorities, or that they have not been given enough opportunity to explain the often complex reasons for their flight. The Medical Foundation condemns the British Government's intention to create a designated list of countries from which claims will be deemed to be ill-founded. India is one of seven countries so far selected for this list. Undoubtedly others will be added soon. Asylum seekers from these countries will be given significantly less time to gather evidence for an appeal and the presumption by the authorities that their claim is unfounded will create a further obstacle for our clients in demonstrating that they are genuine refugees. Although there will be exemption from this abbreviated procedure for some who can show they have been tortured, we are still apprehensive that our clients will not have time to collect the necessary evidence at the appeal stage. While the Medical Foundation welcomes this safeguard, we do not yest know whether the details of torture will emerge soon enough to prevent "fast tracking" and its associated risks for our clients. The danger is compounded by the Home Office practice of interviewing as many asylum seekers as possible immediately upon arrival in the UK (the Short Procedure). Our clients will probably find it hard to say everything they need to in order to convince the interviewing officer. Without advice they do not know what is relevant, and some may be too traumatised, exhausted or confused to be able to reveal all the necessary details so soon after arrival. With only a brief time to put in further evidence, the Short Procedure makes it likely that their claim willnot be properly assessed. As a result, clients from countries on the designated list, may now be at greater risk of being sent back to face further persecution or even death. Introduction to the second edition (July 1999) Since the publication of the first edition a general perception has developed that the political situation has stabilised in the Punjab and that terrorist activity has abated. However, torture survivors still reach the UK, and many claim that the Punjab police continue to target Sikhs and that gross ill-treatment in police stations persists. In the UK the designation of certain countries, including India, considered by the British Government to be free of political persecution (the so-called White List), is to be abandoned. Nevertheless, there still appears to be a reluctance among asylum officials to accept that individual Punjab Sikhs have been tortured, and the application of asylum procedures seems to be more stringent than ever. In spite of the Indian Government's protestations that security agents accused of torture are being identified and punished, there is clear evidence that police still practise routine discrimination, bribery and torture without fear of retribution. We have continued to see clients from the Punjab who allege that they were tortured, some quite recently. Of the 39 clients who have been medically examined since the first edition, seven claim to have been detained in Indian police stations between May 1997 and July 1998. They all exhibited much the same pattern of abuse and injury as those previously examined. A study of 95 Sikh refugees seeking asylum in the UK by Duncan Forrest FRCS Between November 1991 and March 1999, 341 Sikhs attended the Medical Foundation. I personally interviewed and examined 95 men, who are the subject of this section. This represents and unknown but certainly small percentage of all the Sikhs applying for asylum in the UK. All but three, who were fluent in English, were interviewed with the aid of Punjabi-speaking interpreters to ensure accurate communication. Three of them were seen in detention. All the others came to the Medical Foundation in London, one after having recently been released from detention. All were asylum seekers. The examination of clients seeking asylum has some distinctive features. The need to obtain a complete picture of detentions means that every possible detail about the circumstances and methods of interrogation and the weapons used for beating has to be elicited, but this often conflicts with patient's real fear of talking about their experiences. Consequently, the interviews have to be conducted with extreme patience and are accordingly often very time consuming. Occasionally, recalling certain details causes the subject extreme distress, and on several occassions these interviews were interrupted by weeping. Similarly, physical examination is likely to induce painful reminders of torture and has to be conducted gently. Occassionally the physical examination could not be carried out fully at the first interview because it caused undue distress. Findings The 95 men studied were aged from 17 to 58 years when seen, but had been aged between 14 and 53 when first arrested. The subjects came from a rather narrow social spectrum. All but eight (who had left school by the age of 12) were educated to at least secondary level, and nine were graduates. Thirty-eight of them had joined the All India Sikh Students' Federation (AISSF) while at school or college, and many worked actively for the organisation.Thirty belonged to other political organisations, while 27 admitted no political affiliation at all and claimed that their detentions were arbitary, due to mistaken identity or else were caused by the political activities of relatives or friends. All the men except one claimed that before their first arrest they were fit and had not suffered from serious disease or injury. One of them was a fulltime athlete (a middle-distance runner), one was a professional hockey player who had played for India, one had played volleyball for the Punjab and one was a professional kabbadi player. They reported detentions between the years 1978 and July 1998: the longest interval between release from the last detention and interview at the Medical Foundation was 8 years 3 months and the shortest 6 months. The number of detentions overnight or longer Number of detentions Number of clients 1 21 2 27 3 18 4 9 5 6 6 3 7 1 8 3 10 2 12 1 many time 3 35 1 The man who reported 35 detentions might not have been believed had he not produced police records detailing them. Detention was usually for a comparatively short time on each occassion, ranging from one to 10 days, but totals ranged from two days to eight months in police custody. The large majority were never charged with any offense. In addition to the detentions listed, several stated that they had many times been held, questioned and threatened but not detained overnight. Methods of ill-treatment All reported severe ill-treatment, usually worst in the first few days of detention. An indication of the severity of their beating was the statement by 82 of them that on one or more occasions they had been beaten unconscious. One man said that he was beaten only with truncheons, but the others all claimed to have been beaten with an assortment of weapons, including fists, boots, blows with lathis (long stout bamboo canes), leather belts with metal buckles, pattas (leather straps with wooden handles) or rifle butts. One was beaten with a branch torn from a thorn bush, five with metal rods and one with a metal chain. In addition, 57 reported being suspended by the wrists, ankles or hair and then beaten. A particularly painful method of suspension, which was suffered by 20 men, is to tie the wrists or arms behind the back and then suspend the whole body weight by them. Most survivors of this treatment have permanent damage to the shoulder joints. Eleven men had their arms twisted behind their back, 22 had their hands trodden on or hammered and ten were repeatedly thrown against a wall or the floor. Thirty five were given electric shocks, either by a magneto or from a mains socket. One man was forced to pass urine into a bucket and another passed urine into an electric fire, giving painful electric shocks in the <admin-profanity filter activated>. One was given shocks while in a water tank. Fourteen suffered burns, and seven had their nails pulled out by pliers. While these methods of torture are found in many countries, there are some which appear to be peculiar to the Indian police, using local items of equipment. The lathi is the standard weapon issued to the Indian police. Being long and stout it delivers punishing blows which often cause unconsciousness. However, it tends not to cause an open wound except over a bony point. There is often a metal knob on the end which in one case was claimed to be sharpened to a point and used to poke the victim painfully. One method we have not seen practised in other countries (though it has been reported in neighbouring Kashmir) is given the nickname of cheera ("tearing" in Punjabi). It consists of forcing the hips strongly apart, often to 180-degrees, sometimes repeatedly and at other times continuously for 30 minutes or more. This is often done with the victim sitting on the floor with a policeman behind him pulling the head back by the hair while pressing a knee into the back, but in three cases was achieved when the victim was strapped to a manja or charpoi (a wooden bed frame). Forty-eight men reported this torture, four of them stating that they heard and felt the muscles tearing while others reported that extensive bruising appeared in their groins immediately afterwards. Two men, on examination, had severe scarring in the groin which could have been caused only by excessive stretching of the skin. Another method, alleged by 69 men, involves the use of a thick wooden roller. The police sometimes have a thick log of wood or a steel tube kept for the purpose, but they often use a ghotna, the pestle about four feet long and four inches in diameter which is used locally for grinding corn or spices. One man reported being beaten on the back with the ghotna, one had the ghotna placed between the thighs and then the ankles tied forcibly together, 19 had the ghotna placed behind the knees and then the legs flexed over it, but the commonest method, applied in 63 cases, was for the ghotna to be rolled slowly down the thighs or calves with one or more of the heaviest policemen standing on it. Fouteen men suffered both of the last two methods. Usually the roller was said to be smooth and cause no break in the skin, though the pain was unbearable. One man, however, stated that the surface was rough and cut the skin, while another said that a square-section table leg was used. Sometimes the roller was made of stone or metal and clearly made specifically for the purpose. One had "Welcome" written on it and another was labelled "75kg". Burns were inflicted with a hot iron rod in eight cases, an electric iron in one, hot candle wax in four, caustic liquad in one and, in one case, the victim was suspended head down over an electric fre. Sexual abuse was uncommon in this group though five men had hot chillies or petrol pushed into the rectum. Psychological abuse Forty-nine men reported being threatened with further punishment, death or harm to family. Six experienced mock executions, and others were told that police could easily make it appear that the detainee had been shot in a gun battle or when attempting to escape ("false encounter"). Twenty suffered extreme humiliation, often with the removal of the five sacred objects which baptised Sikhs wear at all times. One particularly devout man had cigarette smoke and ash blown in his face, alcohol poured into his mouth and threats of having his beard and hair cut off. He remembered this as worse than his (very severe) physical abuse. Conclusions The uncomfortable conclusion is unavoidable - that at least some asylum applicants are being unjustly labelled as "economic migrants", "bogus refugees" or "abusive claimants" and refused asylum to which, by any humane or legal standards, they are fully entitled. They are in danger of being sent back to an environment they rightly fear, of summary detention, torture, "disappearance" or execution in a "false encounter". All the evidence provided by human rights agencies as well as the continuing number of clients at the Medical Foundation who claim that they have been tortured in the late 1990s suggests that, although terrorist activity has largely died out, police brutality is still rife. Fresh examples of torture are still surfacing in the Punjab as well as other parts of India. The traditional methods that the Indian police have employed from time immemorial appear still to be in common use. Seven of the cases I have seen recently have reported severe torture, including all the methods described here, during detentions between May 1997 and July 1998. The fears that these Punjabi Sikh asylum seekers entertain are both real and justified. Decisions on 36 asylum claims by Simon Malcolm This section is a study of 36 cases documented by the Medical Foundation since the publication of the first edition of this report. The subjects are Sikhs of Indian nationality whose applications for refugee status to the Home Office were refused after October 1996, the date of the first edition of this report. All 36 cases were initially rejected by the Home Office. Of these, documentation was available for analysis in 17 cases which were appealed to the Immigration Appellate Authority. Only three of these appeals were successful. Documentation was also available for one case which was taken to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal. This case was unsuccessful. Conclusions It is apparent from this study that a prevailing climate of disbelief exists among UK authorities toward Sikh asylum applicants. Many Sikhs in this sample clearly demonstrated that they had a claim that fulfilled the 1951 Convention. It was shown that the Home Office did not perform an independent assessment of these asylum claims, and thus did not comply with UNHCR recommendations in this area. Refusal letters were not written individually, but were assembled from a range of cover-all standard paragraphs, which did not necessarily reflect the distinctive circumstances of each case. Much was made of the fact that the general situation in the Punjab had improved, yet isolated but compelling evidence of human rights abuses by Indian authorities were routinely ignored when assessing asylum claims. Claims of torture were largely disregarded by the Home Office, often in the context of an overall negative finding about the applicant's credibility. It was also illustrated how credibility was regularly dismissed on a number of spurious grounds. Adjudicators of the Immigration Appellate Authority also seemed unwilling to judge Sikh asylum claims on their merits, instead often relying on the Home Office's own arguments in their determinations. It was clear that adjudicators rarely overturned a decision by the Home Office (only three of 17 in this sample), reinforcing the need for the Home Office to make a fair appraisal of the claim in its original decision. Expert medical evidence was directly challenged, or diluted in weight by attributing evidence to possible causes other than torture by the authorities without expert testimony being offered to explain any opposing conclusion about how particular sequelae were received. The issue of incorrect certification is also a major concern, as it denies an asylum seeker the right to appeal a decision by the adjudicator. A large majority of cases were certified (25 of the 36 in this sample), in contravention of section 5(5) of the 1996 Act, in spite of the fact that allegations of torture were made in each of those cases. From the 36 cases documented since publication of the first edition of this report, the Medical Foundation concludes that Sikhs in India are still suffering torture and ill-treatment at the hands of the Indian authorities. Despite ample evidence of this suffering, the asylum system in the UK denies sanctuary to Sikhs seeking to escape torture in their homeland.

Vahegru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.sikhsangat.org/publish/article_347.shtml Sikh Octogenarian Back to Prison By Sikh Sangat News Aug 30, 2005, 04:30 Baba Gurdev Singh on his last day of parole accompanied by Bhai Surinder Singh of Shiromani Khalsa Dal (left) and S. Navkiran Singh Advocate from LHRI (Lawyers for Human rights International )on the right Despite the promises of the Akali and Congress Governments of the times; Baba Gurdev Singh who is 85 years old will go back to prison (Nabha Jail) tommorow when he finshes his period of parole. The imprisonment sentence slapped on this innocent Sikh has been over long ago but he is still being held in prison for the reasons best known to the Government. This is another blatant violation of Human Rights and daylight abuse of Sikhs by the present regime in India. It is worth mentioning here that Baba Gurdev Singh can hardly walk, has sore feet with open wounds, hard of hearing, very poor eyesight and suffers from diabetes.

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! This is not politics, to care for our elders is Sikhi, to care for those Sikhs who are suffering under tyranny is surely Sikhi. But if he does that this is politics then ask him what is Miri-Piri ? Is that not Sikhi ?

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.sikhsangat.org/publish/article_254.shtml Khalsa Dal highlights plight of Sikhs languishing in jails By SikhSangat News Aug 7, 2005, 07:21 Baba Gurdev Singh telling about his suffering. Aged 85, with an old senile body, a hunched back, suffering from diabetes, sore feet with open wounds and hard of hearing Baba Gurdev Singh from village Kaleke, Distt. Moga is languishing in jail sentenced to 135 years of imprisonment. His only fault is that his young son Bal Bahadar Singh deserted the Indian Army as he was emotionally depressed and upset by the happenings of 1984 when Indian Government attacked Siri Harimandir Sahib Amritsar. The younger brother of Baba Gurdev Singh, Bhai Jora Singh (70) is also serving a life sentence in the Jail booked under the draconian law abbreviated as TADA, which stands for Terrorist And Disruptive Activities act. The fault of Bhai Jora Singh is that he had raised voice against the false cases filed against his elder brother Baba Gurdev Singh. Talking to the press he said “The Punjab police has already killed my two sons and I don't know why they are keeping me in jail even after completion of my life sentence. I don't know what danger they have from an 85 year old who is suffering from so many ailments and is hard of hearing.” With tears in his eyes he continued “My younger son who left military was killed in a fake encounter by Punjab Police on 17 December 1987. After that all hell was let loose on my family. My elder son was killed by Punjab Police Cats (Kalian Bilian) and his dead body was thrown in the village to terrorize people.” He further narrated how he and his younger brother Bhai Jora Singh were brutally tortured by the police umpteen number of times and when nothing came out of interrogation they were booked under TADA and sent to High Security Nabha Jail. Police brutality did not stop here. About 7 years ago Punjab Police picked up his third son, Kinder Singh. When the mother Bibi Surjit Kaur came to know of this she tried locating her son but failed to do so. She died of the shock of loosing her only remaining son. Telling this horrific tale of brutality heaped on his innocent family his eyes were watery and throat lumpy, but he carried on. In 1989 when a police party was ruthlessly beating the brothers, his uncle objected to the actions of the police and asked them to stop. The police made his uncle a target as well and because of atrocious beating his uncle died overnight. Baba Gurdev Singh said that he has come on parole for the 9th time and all his record during these 9 paroles is spotless but in police files he is still responsible for sedition, secessionist activities and a danger to the security of the country. At one point in time there was a move to free all lifers above 60 years by Jail Minister Inderjit Singh Zira but the Punjab Police DSP Moga had scuttled the move by declaring that the release of TADA detainees will be a danger to the peace and security of the state. Shiromani Khalsa Dal (SKD) held a press conference to highlight the plight of these Sikhs languishing in jails. SKD spokesperson Swaran Singh Khalsa said, "Eighty five-year-old Gurdev Singh, a resident of Kalke village near Moga was booked under TADA and has been languishing in jails for twelve-and-a-half years. We impress upon the government, especially in view of the announcements it made that it would release the sikh youth, that old sikhs like Gurdev Singh should be released immediately." Bhai Swaran Singh Khalsa informed that this tale of Baba Gurdev Singh and Bhai Jora Singh is not a single instance but there are many such cases of blatant injustice and violation of human rights. The Dal has prepared a list of such Sikhs who have been serving sentences for over a decade and jailed without any case or court hearings. These include Kuldip Singh (12yrs in jail), Gurnam Singh (13yrs in jail), Major Singh (15yrs in jail), Balbir Singh (12yrs in jail), Lal Singh Phagwara (13yrs in jail), Ravinder Singh Bittu (14yrs in jail), Daya Singh Fauji (12yrs in jail), Balraj Singh (12yrs in jail), and Sarabjit Singh (12yrs in jail). These prisoners are not just at Nabha Jail but also all over India in places like Ambala Jail and Ratnagiri Special Jail. The leaders of the party also said that they would approach Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee president Paramjeet Singh Sarna to take up the matter with the Centre. http://www.witness84.com/arrestspunjab/

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=76705 Nanavati let off all police officers from worst massacre site Officer in charge of Trilokpuri, where almost 40% of killings occurred, admitted he knew of attacks before Express reporters alerted his bosses. Yet, Nanavati did nothing MANOJ MITTA Posted online: Sunday, August 21, 2005 at 0208 hours IST NEW DELHI, AUGUST 20: The largest Sikh massacre in a single locality in 1984 took place at Block Nos 32 and 36 of Trilokpuri in East Delhi, where, according to the Nanavati Commission, ‘‘almost all Sikh males of these two blocks were killed.’’ Out of the official death toll of 2,733 in the carnage, East Delhi alone accounted for 1,086 deaths. And yet, what got lost in the debate over Jagdish Tytler’s resignation and the Prime Minister’s evocative speech in Parliament, was one startling fact: none of the police officials Nanavati indicted was from this area or from anywhere in East Delhi—or even from West Delhi, the two worst-affected police districts in that order. In fact, although all six police districts of Delhi were affected by the 1984 carnage in varying degrees, Nanavati recommended action against police officials from only three of them. Sewa Dass, who was then in charge of East Delhi, is now special commissioner, the number two in the Delhi Police. He is due to retire next month. The Nanavati Commission did not recommend any action against him even after recording the allegation made by ‘‘many witnesses’’ that Sewa Dass and his subordinates in East Delhi ‘‘had even encouraged the mobs while they were attacking Sikhs.’’ The commission glossed over one sensational discovery that was made about the Trilokpuri massacre in the course of the inquiry. That Sewa Dass knew about the mass killings in Block Nos 32 and 36 long before The Indian Express reporters Rahul Bedi and Joseph Maliakan—Bedi has since left the newspaper—brought it to the notice of the police headquarters in the evening of November 2. Logbooks of wireless messages produced by the police before the Nanavati Commission showed for the first time that Sewa Dass had been informed by the local police station about the Trilokpuri violence more than 24 hours before his superiors came to know about it from the reporters of The Indian Express. Confronted with this documentary evidence, Sewa Dass admitted in writing to the Nanavati Commission in 2002: ‘‘I had received a message from SHO Police Station Kalyanpuri at about 1510 hours on 1.11.84 that looting and killing was going on in Block No. 32 and Block No. 36 of Trilokpuri.’’ This puts the onus on him to explain why, despite the message that came to him from his SHO in the afternoon of November 1, he failed to alert his superiors and call for reinforcements that could have averted the bulk of the killings in the night between November 1 and 2. The most the Commission could say: ‘‘Vital information appears to have been suppressed deliberately by the police at all levels and the gravity of the situation was tried to be minimised.’’ For its own suppression of evidence against Sewa Dass and its failure to recommend action against him, the Commission mentioned a technicality: “As departmental inquiry was held against him and he has been exonerated, the Commission does not recommend any action against him.” This flies in the face of the indictment of a similarly placed police officer, Chandra Prakash, who was Sewa Dass’s counterpart in South Delhi. Brushing aside Chandra Prakash’s plea that he too had been exonerated in a departmental inquiry, the Commission said: ‘‘The object, nature and scope of inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act is quite different. It has a much wider scope than a departmental inquiry or a criminal trial.’’ The Commission’s report gives no explanation for why it did not adopt the same approach to East Delhi, which saw killings on an even larger scale, and make a similar recommendation against Seva Dass and his men. When asked wasn’t it odd that the Commission made no recommendations against any of the police officials in charge of East Delhi, Sewa Dass told The Indian Express: ‘‘Nothing odd. Everybody has already been exonerated in the departmental inquiry.’’ But that did not stop the Commission from indicting your counterparts in South Delhi? ‘‘What can I say? The judge (Justice G T Nanavati) is the right person to answer that question,’’ he said.

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! Scot-free: The killers in uniform Tehelka - The People's Paper August 18, 2005 http://www.tehelka.com/story_main13.asp?fi...ot_free_the.asp # Senior police officers, who were held responsible for inciting anti-Sikh violence in 1984, were not merely exonerated; they were rewarded with promotions and gallantry awards. And now, the Nanavati Commission has given them a clean chit. Ajmer Singh reports They were held responsible for the bloody carnage of 1984 ­ for directly or indirectly inciting the killings of Sikhs. Yet, these men in uniform, protectors who turned perpetrators of crime, were rewarded with promotions and police medals. Some others, who played with evidence and were to be dismissed from service for being ?a slur on the police force?, were exonerated and have since retired gracefully. Tehelka dug up details on police officers who were to be dismissed from service, but were instead granted promotions. The Government of India (GOI) appointed the Kusum Lata Mittal Committee in 1987, comprising Justice Dilip Kapoor and Kusum Lata Mittal, to inquire into the conduct of the Delhi Police during the 1984 riots. The report, submitted separately by Mittal in 1990, indicted 72 officers. Yet, no action was taken against these officers. The Justice Jain-Agarwal Committee, also appointed to inquire into the riots, scrutinised over 400 firs and found improper investigations were carried out by the police. However, most cases ended in acquittals. Ved Marwah, the first police officer to inquire into police lapses, was asked to stop his investigations midway. In his affidavit to the Nanavati Commission, Marwah disclosed that he was asked to discontinue his probe even before he could examine senior police officers. Ranjit Singh Narula, retired Chief Justice of Punjab & Haryana High Court, and a witness before the commission, in his affidavit disclosed that handwritten notes prepared by Marwah were destroyed following instructions from higher authorities. But Justice GT Nanavati, in his report, ignored all these observations and let-off the guilty. No action was recommended against the guilty officers even though there was credible evidence. The only exception was the then Police Commissioner, SC Tandon, and a Sub-Inspector (SI), Hoshiar Singh, who were held responsible for failing to maintain the law and order and for dereliction of duty respectively. However, no action can be initiated against them, as both of them have now retired. The Mittal Committee exposed the police brutality and their connivance with criminals. Over 1,200 Sikhs were killed in the east district of Delhi. According to the committee, a DCP concealed a number of bodies and directed his subordinates to register only a few cases. Yet, no action was taken against the officers. In all, 147 officers were indicted. The Justice Jain-Agarwal Committee also indicted many police officers. However, no action was taken against most of them (42 had either retired or were dead). As for the remaining 105 officers, the Ministry of Home Affairs (mha) processed eight cases, and 97 were processed by the Delhi government. Five officers were exonerated by the mha. In one case a cut in pension was recommended for five years, and in another case a restraint order was passed by the Delhi hc against a DCP. In another DCP?s case the report was delayed, which has now been forwarded to the mha. No action was taken in the 97 cases that the Delhi government processed. A few examples: Sewa Das Das, who was the DCP (East) during the anti-Sikh riots, is now special commissioner, Delhi Police. According to the Kusum Lata Mittal Committee report, Das was prima facie responsible for failing to supervise and providing leadership to his subordinates. The report said: ?The conduct of Sewa Das is a slur on the name of any police force and he should not be trusted with or assigned any job of responsibility, in fact, he is not considered fit for being retained in service. The report further said, ?Sewa Das removed Sikh officers from duty who were inclined to take proper measures to deal with the rioters. The shos under his jurisdiction systematically disarmed the Sikhs, as a result they couldn?t protect themselves. At the same time no steps were taken to provide police protection to them to protect their lives and property. Sewa Das did not keep his superior officers informed of the killings which continued under his jurisdiction, which amounted to concealment of information and failure to discharge duties? there is no evidence to show that he took action to control the situation. The conclusion can be drawn that he knew what had to be done by him and his force is not to take any action against the rioters and killers. ?Sewa Das made blatant efforts to conceal the number of killings even when dead bodies were lying around him and he directed his subordinates to register only a few cases in each area which were illegal. The killings continued till November 5, which could have been prevented.... Sewa Das and sho Kalyanpuri have been mainly responsible for the mass killings, Shoorvir Singh Tyagi in Kalyanpuri/Trilokpuri and Sewa Das in the whole district. Subsequently, continuous efforts have been made by them and on their behalf to ensure that people do not depose against them. It is necessary in public interest to dispense with the services of such officers. Nanavati on Sewa Das ?As the departmental inquiry was held against him and he has been exonerated the commission does not recommend any action against him,? the Nanavati report said. In the same report, while examining the role of Chander Prakash, the then DCP (South) and sho OP Yadav, who were also exonerated in departmental inquiries, Nanavati said, ?The contentions raised by both these officers are without any substance. The object, nature and scope of inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiries Act is quite different. It has a much wider scope than a departmental inquiry or a criminal trial? The Commission is, therefore, of the view that it can look into the conduct?? This logic is bizarre. If Nanavati thought it fit to recommend action against Chander Prakash, then why not against Sewa Das? Shoorvir Singh Tyagi Tyagi, who was sho Kalyanpuri/ Trilokpuri in 1984, is now ACP. More than 500 Sikhs were killed in his area. The Kusum Lata Mittal Committee had this to say on Tyagi?s role: ?His attempts, to a great extent successful, in obtaining affidavits in his favour by browbeating the witnesses indicate that it is highly unlikely that any witness would have the courage of coming and giving evidence against him? it has been seen that the police staff of Kalyanpuri, particularly si Manphool Singh, have been helping Shoorvir Singh Tyagi by bringing over persons to be pressurised to depose in his favour. However, this sho is a living shame for any police organisation and the best way to get rid of him in public interest would be to take action under Article 311(2) (b) of the Constitution. This would perhaps restore some confidence in the mind of public. Nanavati on Shoorvir Singh Tyagi ?sho Tyagi has stated that he was falsely implicated by his seniors and that in both the criminal cases that were filed against him he has been discharged. The revision petitions filed against the orders of discharge have been dismissed by the Delhi hc. In view of his acquittal now no action is recommended against him,? the Nanavati report said. What Nanavati fails to record is that the sanction for prosecution was not granted, which is why the case was discharged. The Mittal Committee?s recommendations against ?the living shame for any police organisation? still stand. UK Katna Katna who was DCP (West) during the riots is now a dgp in the Northeast. More than 900 Sikhs were killed in his area. When one victim, Harminder Singh, sought his help, Katna said: ?What can we do? The dead bodies of Hindus filled in trains are also coming from Punjab?. On November 1, 1984, a serious incident took place at Samrat Enclave, Punjabi Bagh police station. Three persons were killed by a mob in the presence of the DCP. The mob was not dispersed and there was no police firing. No separate fir was registered for murder of three persons, but an fir was registered under Sections 411 and 412 of the IPC. In Tilak Nagar, three firs were registered ­ against Sikhs. Major NS Phul, a resident of West Delhi, was taken by the DCP to the police station where he was beaten up, tortured and his licenced pistol snatched. The Kusum Lata Mittal Committee stated that Katna failed to rise to the occasion and is unfit to head a district. It recommended a major penalty against him. The additional force of companies made available to him on November 1, 1984 were not utilised, no force was sent to Sultanpuri, Nangloi and Najafgarh, from where rioting was reported. Further affidavits filed stated that a large number of dead bodies were removed or burnt with the help of police in order to destroy evidence of killings. Nanavati on UK Katna Justice Nanavati said that police officers have been exonerated in departmental inquiries and therefore, no action is recommended against them. A contradiction again, for the Chander Prakash argument could have been applied here too. He was let off despite the fact that witnesses had levelled allegations against Katna. HC Jatav Jatav, who was Additional Commissioner of Police in North district during 1984, has now retired. Over 150 Sikhs were killed and scores of affidavits filed suggest that a number of miscreants apprehended by the residents were let off by Jatav. According to the Kusum Lata Mittal report, ?The role of HC Jatav, Additional Commissioner of Police (Delhi range) during the riots has been questionable, partisan and inexcusable. He was obviously in sympathy with some local leaders and disinclined to take action against the culprits. He demoralised the Sikh officers under his charge by ordering their transfers and the substitutes sent miserably failed to control the situation. For an officer of his seniority and experience, displaying no will to act when riots were spreading in the capital of the country is indeed deplorable. Such an officer is not fit to be retained in a disciplined force. Nanavati on HC Jatav Justice Nanavati recommended no action against Jatav despite witnesses filing affidavits against him. Chander Prakash Prakash, who was DCP South in 1984, has now retired. In South district more than 500 Sikhs were killed and according to the Kusum Lata Mittal Committee arson, loot and killings took place because of the dubious role played by the DCP and his staff in this district. In some police stations it has been quite evident that the police was actually hand-in-gloves with the leaders of the mobs with the blessings of the DCP/Additional DCP (Ajay Chadha). In some areas the police even announced that the curfew was only for the Sikhs and not for others which is indeed surprising. In respect of some police stations like Delhi Cantonment and Srinivaspuri, there are direct allegations against DCP (South) that he was openly encouraging the mobs to indulge in violence. In the Delhi Cantonment, apart from the affected persons, Ramesh Singh Rana, si Sagarpur division, went on record to say that the DCP (South) and Additional DCP told rioters that they should not be present when the police was in the locality, but otherwise they could continue with their activities. The si was also instructed not to resort to firing. To destroy evidence, wireless log books of the DCP and Additional DCP were tampered with. Santokh Singh said the DCP ordered the police to fire on the Sikhs, who were trying to protect their vehicles from the mob. According to him, the looters who were caught red-handed by Gautam Kaul, Additional Commissioner of Police, in Srinivaspuri and Defence Colony area, have not been accounted for in the police records. They were let off even though his superior had himself caught them. Kaul, during his visit to Defence Colony and New Friends Colony, instructed the DCP (South) to register as many cases as possible, and to create special investigation teams in the police stations for the registration of firs and for subsequent investigation. However, the DCP and his staff did exactly the opposite. He let off the criminals who were arrested by the ACP or who were brought to the police stations in the presence of the ACP. The report recommended that if faith in the administration has to be restored, officers like DCP Chander Prakash have no place in a disciplined force and should be dealt with in an exemplary manner. It said Prakash appears to be absolutely unfit to be retained in service and the government should consider his case for being dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Article 311 (2) (b) of the Constitution of India. As far as Ajay Kumar Chadha, additional DCP is concerned, disciplinary action was recommended against him. Nanavati on Chander Prakash The Nanavati Commission asked the government to consider if action could be taken against Chander Prakash. This, despite the fact that the Mittal Committee report had observed that officers like Prakash, have no place in a disciplined force and should be dealt with in an exemplary manner. The government, however, stated in its atr that most of the police officers have either retired or been exonerated in inquiries, hence it is difficult to initiate any action at this stage. Amod Kanth Kanth, who was DCP Central district during the riots, is now joint commissioner. This was another district affected by mob violence and a number of people were burnt alive. Kanth arrested 16 members of a family, including old women and children, whose houses were attacked by the mob. This family fired in self-defence but was arrested. The Delhi government recommended his name for a gallantry award and described this family as ?16 desperadoes?. A subsequent government notification stated them to be ?miscreants? who were ?overpowered? by the police. The family was implicated in a police case for the death of two persons killed in firing but the forensic reports gave them a clean chit stating that these deaths were not from bullets fired from their weapons. One member of the family, Trilok Singh, stated in his affidavit, that these persons (Mangal and Krishan) were killed in cross firing between the police and the military. Earlier, the court had also given them relief stating that the firing was in self-defence. Despite receiving the forensic report, no action was taken against the guilty officials. Instead, Kanth and SS Manan, sho, were given the President?s medal for gallantry. A news item appeared in papers that terrorists have been arrested, who were firing at the police and military. Nanavati on Amod Kanth According to the Nanavati Commission report it did not find any material to prove that DCP Amod Kanth and sho SS Manan had failed to perform their duties or that they had an anti-Sikh attitude. The report says the officers did not also misuse their positions in treating the families of Trilok Singh and his uncle. The vital forensic report was conveniently ignored.

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! Check out http://earth.google.com This software is free to download and install (need broadband to run) and is sikkkk Satellite images of earth...

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.navhindtimes.com/stories.php?pa...&Story_ID=08183 1984 Riots: Don’t Shield the Killers by Praful Bidwai AS organised violence raged through bustee after bustee and colony after colony of Delhi, the police stood by and watched. Worse, in many cases, they participated in the bloody carnage and looting. The higher authorities had enough warning of trouble within a few hours of Indira Gandhi’s assassination on October 31, but did nothing to prevent it. This writer had just flown into Delhi from Mumbai that morning and witnessed the events from a vantage point. By the early afternoon, tension was palpable in the air. False and malicious rumours flew thick and fast about how “thousands of Sikhs” had celebrated the assassination by distributing sweets. “They must be taught a lesson”, it was whispered. Then president Zail Singh’s car was stoned as he left the All-India Institute of Medical Sciences. By the evening, systematic killing and arson had begun-at the behest of Congress leaders, who mobilised mobs crying for “revenge”. Columns of smoke rose all over the city. Cars and two- and three-wheelers were stopped to check the identity of the passengers. All bearded men were threatened. According to official accounts, as many as 2,733 people were killed in the worst orgy of communal violence in independent India, barring Gujarat. Twenty one years and nine inquiry commissions later, the perpetrators of the carnage have still not been brought to book. Not a single politician or policeman has been convicted. A small fraction (only 13 people) of the thousands who killed, raped and burned have been held guilty. All hopes that the Nanavati Commission, appointed five years ago to inquire into the orgy of killing, rape and pillage, would spur adequate corrective action now stand belied. The government’s Action Taken Report (ATR), tabled six months after the commission submitted its own report, is yet another black mark in this prolonged cover-up of the state’s collusion with premeditated killings and its repeated betrayal of the victims. The Nanavati report is far from perfect, indeed shoddy in parts. It recognises that the violence was “systematic”, “organised”, and conducted under “instructions”, but fails to fix culpability, especially at the apex level. The judge was working within the narrow confines of the evidence presented to him and did not demand fresh investigations. Evidence in cases of serious communal violence can often be manipulated: testimonies can be withdrawn or changed. The role of Congress politicians in plotting and organising the carnage has been well-documented. They took their cue from the moral ambiguity of Rajiv Gandhi who infamously said: “When a big tree falls, the earth shakes.” The coterie around Rajiv Gandhi, including Messrs Jagdish Tytler, H K L Bhagat, Sajjan Kumar, Arun Nehru and Kamal Nath instigated or condoned a campaign of mayhem and killing. Mr Justice Nanavati, for incomprehensible reasons, found the Delhi authorities collectively guilty, but individually innocent-a contradiction in terms. He also held that top Delhi administration officials, including then lt governor, Mr P G Gavai and police commissioner, Mr S C Tandon, should not be prosecuted because they have retired. This makes no sense. You can’t accuse the police of “colossal failure” to maintain law and order and of “collusion” and “ineffectiveness” in stopping the looting and killing-and yet let them off the hook. Mr Tandon may have retired, but he is liable for actions committed while holding a high office. As for Mr Gavai, he took his orders from the Union home ministry, as the lt governor of any Union territory must. He seems to have been made a scapegoat. It’s recorded that Mr Gavai ordered Mr Tandon to call in the army in the morning of November 1. However, the army arrived in all six police districts of Delhi only on November 3, by which time hundreds of lives had been lost. And home minister, Narasimha Rao was worse. He was only interested in protecting his friends; and he “hid like a rat” for three days after the violence broke out. Clearly, there was no political will to stop the violence, and later, to punish its perpetrators. The Congress party is also trying to pretend that only “local-level” leaders had a hand in instigating the violence. This simply won’t do. Even more disgracefully, the Centre failed to commit itself to taking action even where the Nanavati report warrants it. It’s only under the Left’s and his UPA allies’ pressure that Dr Manmohan Singh asked Mr Tytler to resign, and Mr Sajjan Kumar too made his inglorious exit. But there was “credible evidence” that he “very probably” organised anti-Sikh attacks. The government originally tried to dilute the observation as amounting to “probabilistic” evidence. But all criminal cases are registered on probabilistic evidence! It’s only conviction that needs proof beyond doubt. Similarly, the ATR rules out prosecuting Mr Bhagat because of his poor health and Mr Kamal Nath because of a changed affidavit by a key witness. Poor health can justify a lighter sentence, but not the absence of prosecution. Similarly, it’s for a trial court to evaluate the worth of the evidence against Mr Nath. But the ATR drops their prosecution on flimsy, unconvincing grounds. This is a travesty of justice. Not only will it alienate most Sikhs; it will horrify the public at large and announce to the world that impunity for grave crimes is the rule in India: the powerful cannot be brought to book; the rich rarely go to jail. The law is only applied against the underprivileged and powerless. The UPA must not vacillate over fulfilling its “solemn promise” to pursue investigations against all specific individuals named by Mr Justice Nanavati. It must formally charge them and rehabilitate the victims. It must set up special courts to try all the accused who figure in the reports of earlier commissions, including 72 policemen. A higher principle is involved here. If India is to live up to the great democratic aspirations of its people, it must establish and affirm the rule of law-systematically, painstakingly and impartially. This is a precondition for democracy and political legitimacy. The anti-Sikh pogrom presents a special challenge-and an opportunity to do justice to the victims of a gruesome massacre by applying the law to the powerful people who caused it. In a sense, taking prompt and serious action on the Nanavati report will be a prelude to the ultimate test the nation faces: namely, denying impunity to the perpetrators of crimes against humanity in Gujarat. The Gujarat pogrom was even greater in scale and brutality than the Delhi carnage, especially in the bestial quality of the killings and the sexual violence. It was also more directly instigated by the state. India’s claim to high stature in the world does not lie in a Security Council seat or in nuclear weapons, and not even in economic might. It lies in democracy and pluralism. This is where our people’s interests and their greatest achievements are also located. That claim will be reduced to a farce if heinous mass-level crimes and barbaric forms of collective victimisation go unpunished. That would be a tragedy not just for Delhi’s Sikhs or Gujarat’s Muslims, but for all Indian citizens.

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.ndtv.com/morenews/showmorestory...allies&id=77647 Mamta linked to anti-Sikh rallies -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NDTV Correspondent Friday, August 19, 2005 (New Delhi): Communist leader Harkishen Surjeet has hinted that Trinamool Congress leader Mamta Banerjee had organised anti-Sikh rallies in 1984, when prime minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated. A recent article in People's Democracy, which was attributed to Surjeet, said "some political bigwigs, including the so called firebrand lady of Bengal, were trying to organise mayhem in the state." Mamta Banerjee was a leader with the Congress Party in West Bengal when the backlash erupted against the Sikhs. Gandhi was shot by her Sikh bodyguards in Delhi and scores of Sikhs died in reprisal attacks across the country.

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! http://www.gsghks.org.uk/jasbir%20Singh%20Ji%20Khalsa.jpg

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh! You shouldn't be sending Gutka Sahib / Pothi Sahibs etc.... through post

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh ! Anyone record it ??