AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Sreedhar Rao, Acting C.J—WP (C) No. 2391/2009 is filed by the wife of the victim of custodial death and WP(C) No. 2379/2009 is the petition filed by the son and daughter of the victim of the custodial death.
The facts reveal that one Laden Jidung, who is pastor in Vernacular Bible School, Dhansiripar, Nagaland, is a native of Haflong in Dima Hasao district. It is the case of the petitioners that on 30-04-2009, in the evening at about 8.00 p.m., the personnel of 45 Assam Rifle went to the residence of Rajendra Langthasa (Rajan). He was picked up and interrogated. Later on, the said personnel went to the house of Laden Jidung around 8 p.m. at that time Laden Jidung and his wife were present in their house. Laden Jidung was arrested and taken to the 45 Assam Rifle''s camp along with Rajendra Langthasa and both of them were kept in the lockup in the camp overnight. In the morning, Rajendra Langthasa was interrogated and he was released. Laden Jidung was said to have been interrogated by the Assam Rifle personnel, around 11.30 a.m. Laden Jidung was brought to the Haflong Civil Hospital and also local police were informed. By the time Laden Jidung was brought to hospital, he was declared dead. The post mortem was conducted by the Haflong Hospital. The Haflong Civil Hospital authority was not able to give the cause of death; therefore, the body was brought to the GMC, Guwahati and on 03-05-2009, again the post mortem was conducted. The post mortem report discloses that the death is natural.
The post mortem report of Haflong Hospital and the GMC Hospital, Guwahati are as follows:
"Post Mortem Report issued by Civil Hospital Haflong on 1st May. Station Civil Hospital Haflong Day of 1st May, 2009
Ref. S/Bagan TOP GDE No. 05
Post Mortem Report issued by GMC dt. 3rd May''09 Assam Schedule. XLIII (Part I), Form No. 24 Station GMCH, Guwahati Day of 3/5/09
The Deputy Commissioner, Haflong, conducted magisterial inquiry. He recorded statement of Johen Longmailai and Rajen Langthasa, who were also picked up along with Laden Jidung. The Additional District Magistrate gave an opinion that Rajendra Langthasa and Laden Jidung were both picked up together. Later on, on the next day morning, Rajendra Langthasa was released and that he was not aware as to where Laden Jidung was taken. As a result, the Additional District Magistrate, Dima Hasao, Haflong, was not able to give any opinion regarding the cause of death. The enquiry report along with the statement of the witnesses is as follows:
"To The District Magistrate, Dima Hasao District, Haflong.
Sub:- Submission of report of enquiry into the matter regarding alleged custodial death of Shri Ladin Jidung S/O. Late Lonendra Jidung.
Ref. 1. Order vide Memo No. NCH/J. 32/10-11/3648-51 dtd. 24/08/2011.
Letter from Deputy Registrar (Law) National Human Right Commission addressed to the Deputy Commissioner Dima Hasao District date 13/07/2011.
Sir,
With reference to the above subject, I have the honour to submit the report of my enquiry in connection with the alleged custodial death of Shri. Laden Jidung. It would be pertinent to mention here that I have gone through the interim report of enquiry into the said matter submitted by Late JK Bhuyan, ADM to the Deputy Commissioner NC Hills, Haflong on 24/6/2009. Further, I have also noted the observation made by the NCHRC regarding the report of enquiry submitted by late JK Bhuyan, ADM as communicated vide the letter referred to above. Accordingly, I have made my enquiry.
I summoned Sri Rajen Langthasa and Sri Johan Longmailai and recorded their statements which are annexed at Annexure I and II respectively.
Statement of Johen Longmailai:- As stated by Sri. Johen Longmailai, the Gaon Bura of village Jorai, one day in the month of April 2009, he could not recollected the exact date, the Jawan of Assam Rifles raided the village Jorai and took away with them all the materials like rice, utensils etc. stocked at Jorai Club in the middle of the village. As stated by the Gaon Bura these materials belonged to Jorai LP School under the Mid-day Meal Scheme, Johen Longmailai was not present at the time of the Army raid. The villagers decided to approach the Assam Rifles authority to enquire whether the seized materials would be returned to the villagers or not. Since they did not know how to write the application, Johen Longmailai contacted Sri Rajen Langthasa and requested him to write the application. Three to 4 days after this, the personnel of Assam Rifles again went to Jorai village and picked up Johen Longmailai and Jitujit Nunisa from the village and they were brought to the Assam Rifles camp and put in the lock up. As stated by Johen Longmailai, the Army personnel questioned him about the application submitted to the Deputy Commissioner and who had written the application. Johen Longmailai replied that since he was illiterate he approached Sri Rajen Langthasa. Then the Army personnel asked him to show the house of Rajen Langthasa from his home at Sambhudhan Basti. From there the Army personnel took them to Surat Nagar, when they returned Johen Longmailai saw that Laden Jidung was also brought. That night the four of them namely Johen Longmailai, Jitujit Nunisa, Rajen Langthasa and Laden Jidung spent in the lock up of the Assam Rifles Camp. Next morning at about 8.00 AM both Rajen Langthasa and Laden Jidung were taken out of the lock up by the Army personnel. After 1 1/2 (one and half) hour, Rajen Langthasa was brought back to the lock up. As stated by Johen Longmailai, Rajen Langthasa told them that his hand and legs were tied and he was made to drink lots of water by the Army personnel. Thereafter Army personnel brought Johen Longmailai, Jitujit Nunisa and Rajen Langthasa to the Haflong Police Station and they were handed over to the police.
As stated by Johen Longmailai, he did not know whatever happened to Laden Jidung after he was taken out of the lock up along with Rajen Langthasa. Later on he came to know in the Police Station that Laden Jidung is dead.
Statement of Rajen Langthasa:- According to the statement given by Sri Rajendra Langthasa one day in the month of April 2009, the Gaon Bura of village Jorai Shri. Johen Longmailai approached him with a request to write a public petition for getting back the materials seized by the Assam Rifles personnel from Jorai village. Johen Longmailai stated that he approached Laden Jidung to write the petition and accordingly Laden Jidung wrote the petition which was submitted to the Deputy Commissioner NC Hills, Haflong by Rajen Langthasa and Johen Longmailai. After 3/4 days of submission of the petition one evening at about 7.30 the personnel of Assam Rifles came to his house and asked his name and thereafter picked him up in their vehicles. He was then asked as to who had written the complaint to the Deputy Commissioner to which Rajen Langthasa told them the name of Laden Jidung. Then the Army personnel asked Rajen Langthasa to show the direction to Laden Jidung house and Rajen Langthasa led them to Laden Jidung house. Rajen Langthasa stated that he was in a different vehicles and he did not see Army personnel picking up Laden Jidung but he could hear Laden Jidung speak.
Thereafter he was taken to the Assam Rifles camp and put in the lock up and then he found that along with him, Sri Rajen Langthasa, Jitujit Nunisa and Laden Jidung were also brought to the camp and all four spent that night together in the lock up. Rajen Langthasa then stated that the next morning at about 10.00 AM he was taken out of the lock up along with Laden Jidung by the Army personnel. Thereafter they were made walk for some distance and then both Rajen Langthasa and Laden Jidung were blind folded by the Army personnel. After that they were again made to walk for some distance and taken inside a house. There Rajen Langthasa was asked to take off his shirt and trouser and he was left with his undergarment only. Then his hands were tied behind his back and his legs were also tied with rope. Then he was lifted and taken to some distance and made to lie on the floor where the Army personnel questioned him about his involvement with the DHD (J) extremist outfit. The army personnel also questioned him as to why he had written a complaint to the Deputy Commissioner. As stated by Rajen Langthasa, he was made to drink a lot of water during his questioning and kept him on the floor for about half an hour. Then he was again lifted by some person and brought to a distance and untied his hands and legs but did not remove the blindfold. Thereafter, he was again brought on foot for some distance and removed his blind fold and then he saw that he was in front of the lock up. There he saw Johen Longmailai and Jitujit Nunisa in the lock up.
Sri Rajen Langthasa has stated that he was taken out of the lock up along with Laden Jidung and up to the time of being blind folded by the Army personnel they were together. But after being blind folded, Rajen Langthasa did not have any idea as to where Laden Jidung was taken.
On the same day at about 2.00 or 3.00 in the afternoon the Assam Rifles personnel brought Rajen Langthasa, Johen Longmailai and Jitujit Nunisa to the Haflong Police Station and all three of them were handed over to the police.
According to the statement given by Sri Rajen Langthasa, he was not aware about what had happened to Laden Jidung after they were blind folded. He came to know about the death of Laden Jidung in the Police Station.
Observation:- From the statements of both Johen Longmailai and Rajen Langthasa it appear that Laden Jidung was taken out of the lock up by Assam Rifles personnel along with Rajen Langthasa. According to the statement of Rajen Langthasa it seems that he was taken out of the lock up along with Laden Jidung for the purpose of questioning. However, when they were blind folded, Rajen Langthasa could have no idea as to where Laden Jidung was taken and subsequently what had happened to him.
Therefore, from the circumstances as manifested from the statement given by Rajen Langthasa it appear that Laden Jidung was also taken away by the Assam Rifles personnel for the purpose of questioning. Since Rajen Langthasa was blind folded and separated from Laden Jidung, he was not in a position to have any idea as to what had happened to Laden Jidung.
As a result, it does not help to form an opinion regarding the possible cause of death of Laden Jidung.
Yours faithfully Sd/- (Illegible) (Khanindra Choudhury, ACS) Addl. Deputy Commissioner Dima Hasao District, Haflong"
The Government of Assam has filed the inquiry report of the Additional District Magistrate as submitted to the District Magistrate, Haflong, which is as follows:-
"To The District Magistrate, Dima Hasao, Haflong.
Sub:- Magisterial enquiry report in respect of Late Ladin Jidung S/O. Late Lonendra Jidung of Surat Nagar, Haflong � Submission of report thereof.
Ref. Your order vide Memo No. NCH/CON/101/2010/4903-05, Dated Haflong, the 20th Sept./2010.
Sir,
With reference to the above and in continuation to the interim report submitted by the then Addl. Deputy Commissioner late J.K. Bhuyan Vide No. 4137 dated 24.06.2009 I have the honour to add further in the matter of custodial death of late Ladin Jidung which is furnished below.
On 30.04.2009 in the late evening hour some personnel of 45 Assam Rifles went to the residence of Ladin Jidung at Surat Nagar, Sarkari Bagan, Haflong. At first they met with Smti Ruthsan Jidung W/O. Ladin Jidung and alleged her regarding her husband''s attitude of doing anty activities against Assam Rifles and later on they picked up Ladin Jidung (along with some other persons) and taken to the Assam Rifles H/Q by asserting her of returning her husband on the next day. On the next day i.e. on 01.05.2009 the body of Ladin Jidung was taken to the Haflong Civil Hospital by the Assam Rifles personnel''s, by keeping the body in the hospital campus and they left the place. Immediately, the medical staffs who were on duty attended, examined and declared the body as death. Accordingly, as per rule and procedure, the Supdt. of Police, NC Hills vide letter No. CH/Crime/HFGPS/09/1409 dated Haflong, the 1st May/2009 requested the District Magistrate, NC Hills, Haflong for deputation of magistrate for conducting inquest. Late JK Bhuyan, the then Addl. District Magistrate was deputed and inquest was conducted by him. Further, as follow up action a group of doctors of Haflong Civil Hospital conducted P.M. examination of the concerned deceased but report as submitted transpired their inability to ascertain the actual cause of death. As such the In-Charge Supdt., Haflong Civil Hospital vide letter No. HCH/2009/876 dated Haflong, the 1st May, 2009 and the Deputy Commissioner, NC Hills District vide letter No. NCH/CON/SJ/2 dated 1st May, 2009 requested the Professor and Head of Deptt., Forensic Deptt., Guwahati Medical College and Hospital, Dispur, Guwahati for conducting P.M. examination on the body of deceased-Ladin Jidung and to furnish expert opinion as to cause of death. Accordingly, the medical expert of Guwahati opined in the following way,- "DEATH IS DUE TO SYNCOPE AS A RESULT OF ACUTE CORONARY INSUFFICIENCY (NATURAL DEATH).
Findings:- In view of the facts and circumstances stated above and after going through the available relevant reports/papers in connection with the death of Ladin Jidung, it is apt to pronounced that their exist grounds of sliding to the fact of custodial death of deceased but by the opinion concluded by the expert team of health deptt. Can''t be neglected. However, after considering of pros and cons of the whole affairs it is to be submitted that the cause of death of concern deceased may be pronounced as "NATURAL DEATH".
This is for favour of your kind information and necessary action.
Yours faithfully Sd/- (Illegible) Addl. District Magistrate Dima Hasao: Haflong"
Mr. D.C. Chakravorty, ASGI, appearing for the Assam Rifle, has filed counter affidavit sworn by one Capt. Surender Singh, wherein it is stated that Laden Jidung was involved in extremist activities. As per the information, they went and conduct search of his house on 30-04-2009, they found a pistol and other incriminating documents in his house; therefore, he was arrested and brought to the camp along with Rajendra Langthasa for the purpose of interrogation. It is said that on the next day morning when he developed perspiration and chest pain, he was taken to Haflong Hospital where he was found dead. The allegation of custodial torture leading to the death of the victim is denied.
Mr. A.M. Buzarbarua, Senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that the cause of death is shown to be a natural. From the post mortem report it is inferable that the death is due to heart attack. It is because of the torture, the death could have been precipitated. The counsel referred to the post mortem report of Haflong Civil Hospital, wherein the physical injuries, of bruises and ligature marks on wrist and ankle joints are noticed. The said marks of injury suggest that the deceased was subjected to violence and torture and that should have been precepted the death.
The learned counsel in the alternative referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Naga People''s Movement of Human Rights Vs. Union of India (UOI), AIR 1998 SC 465 : (1997) 9 JT 431 : (1997) 7 SCALE 741 : (1997) 7 SCALE 210 : (1998) 2 SCC 109 : (1997) 5 SCR 469 Supp . It is said that a person should not be kept in custody for a longer period than the bare necessity of handing over to the nearest police station and no third degree method to be adopted to extract information or to extract confession of other involvements in unlawful activity. In this case, marks of violence disclose that the deceased was given third degree method and he was also kept in detention in the Assam rifle camp for a longer period than required. The materials on record disclose that the deceased was arrested around 8.00 p.m. in the night along with Rajendra Langthasa. Both were kept in the lockup in the camp and on the next day morning, around 11.30 a.m. Laden Jidung was taken to hospital where he was found dead. The police station was very near to the Assam Rifle camp; therefore, Assam Rifle personnel should have immediately handed over the deceased to the police authorities. Their conduct in detaining him whole night in the lockup till his death around 11.30 a.m. violates the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Naga People''s Movement of Human Rights'' case (supra) wherein the general instruction regarding the list of Dos and Don''ts for the personnel of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 is laid down, which is as follows:
"53. Before we conclude the consideration of the questions regarding the constitutional validity of the Central Act, we may refer to the grievance of the petitioners that there has been wide spread abuse of powers conferred under the Central Act by the personnel of the armed forces while such forces were deployed in the areas declared as '' disturbed areas'' under the Central Act. In the Writ Petitions reference has been made to a number of instances. M/s. Indira Jaising has also placed before us the reports of the commission of Inquiry headed by Shri. Justice D.M. Sen, a retired Judge of Gauhati High Court in respect of some of those instances. On behalf of Union of India it has been submitted that an inquiry is made whenever any complaint about misuse of powers conferred under the Central Act is received and that on enquiry most of the complaints were found to be false, and that whenever it is found that there is substance in the complaint, suitable action has been taken against the person concerned under the provisions of the Army Act. The learned Attorney General has placed before us instructions in the from of a list of "Do''s and Don''ts" that are issued by the Army Headquarters from time to time. The instructions contained in the said list which must be followed while acting under Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 are in these terms:-
"LIST OF DO''S AND DON''TS WHILE ACTING UNDER ARMED FORCES (SPECIAL POWERS) ACT, 1958
Dos
Action before Operation
(a) Act only in the area declared ''Disturbed Area'' under Section 3 of the Act.
(b) Power to open fire using force or arrest is to be exercised under this Act only by an officer/JCO/WO and NCO.
(c) Before launching any raid/search, definite information about the activity to be obtained from the local civil authorities.
(d) As far as possible co-opt representative of local civil administration during the raid.
Action during Operation
(a) In case of necessity of opening fire and using any force against the suspect or any person acting in contravention to law and order, ascertain first that it is essential for maintenance of public order. Open fire only after due warning.
(b) Arrest only those who have committed cognizable offence or who are about to commit cognizable offence or against whom a reasonable ground exists to prove that they have committed or are about to commit cognizable offence or against whom a reasonable ground exists to prove that they have committed or are about to commit cognizable offence.
(c) Ensure that troop under command do not harass innocent people, destroy property of the public or unnecessarily enter into the house/dwelling of people not connected with any unlawful activities.
(d) Ensure that women are not searched/arrested without the presence of female police. In fact women should be searched by female police only.
Action after operation
(a) After arrest prepare a list of the persons so arrested.
(b) Handover the arrested persons to the nearest Police Station with least possible delay.
(c) While handing over to the police a report should accompany with detailed circumstances occasioning the arrest.
(d) Every delay in handing over the suspects of the police must be justified and should be reasonable depending upon the place, time of arrest and the terrain in which such person has been arrested least possible delay may be 2-3 hours extendable to 24 hours or so depending upon particular case.
(e) After raid make out a list of all arms, ammunition or any other incriminating material/document taken into possession.
(f) All such arms, ammunition, stores, etc. should be handed over to the police State along with the seizure memo.
(g) Obtain receipt of persons arms/ammunition, stores etc. so handed over to the police.
(h) Make record of the area where operation is launched having the date and time and the persons participating in such raid.
(i) Make a record of the commander and other officers/JCOs/NCOs forming part of such force.
(k) Ensure medical relief to any person injured during the encounter, if any person dies in the encounter his dead body be handed over immediately to the police along with the details leading to such death.
Dealing with Civil Court
(a) Directions of the High Court/Supreme Court should be promptly attended to.
(b) Whenever summoned by the courts, decorum of the court must be maintained and proper respect paid.
(c) Answer questions of the court politely ad with dignity.
(d) Maintain detailed record of the entire operation correctly and explicitly.
Don''ts
Do not keep a person under custody for any period longer than the bare necessity for handing over to the nearest Police Station.
Do not use any force after having arrested a person except when he is trying to escape.
Do not use third degree methods to extract information or to extract confession or other involvement in unlawful activities.
After arrest of a person by the member of the Armed forces, he shall not be interrogated by the member of the Armed force.
Don not release the person directly after apprehending on your own. If any person is to be released, he must be released through civil authorities.
Do not temper with official records.
The Armed Forces shall not take back person after he is handed over to civil police."
The instructions in the List of "Do''s and Don''ts" which must be followed while providing aid to the civil authority are as under:-
"LIST OF DO''S AND DON''TS WHILE PROVIDING AID TO CIVIL AUTHORITY DO''S
Act in closest possible communication with civil authorities throughout.
Maintain inter-communication if possible by telephone/radio.
Get the permission/requisition from the Magistrate when present.
Use the little force and do as little injury to person and property as may be consistent with attainment of objective in view.
In case you decide to open fire:-
(a) Give warning in local language that fire will be effective.
(b) Attract attention before firing by bugle or other means.
(c) Distribute your men in fire units with specified Commanders.
(d) Control fire by issuing personal orders.
(d) Control fire by issuing personal orders.
(d) Note number of rounds fired.
(f) Aim at the front of crowd actually rioting or inciting to riot or at conspicuous ring leaders, i.e., do not fire into the thick of the crowd at the back.
(g) Aim low and shoot for effect.
(h) Keep Light Machine Gun and medium Gun in reserve.
(i) Cease firing immediately once the object has been attained.
(j) Take immediate steps secure wounded.
Maintain cordial relations with civilian authorities and Para Military Forces.
Ensure high standard of discipline. Don''ts.
Do not use excessive force.
Do not get involved in hand to hand struggle with the mob.
Do not ill treat any one, in particular, women and children.
No harassment of civilians.
No torture.
No meddling in civilian administration affairs.
No meddling in civilian administration affairs.
No military disgrace by loss/surrender of weapons.
Do not Accept presents, donations and rewards.
Avoid indiscriminate firing."
The counsel further submits that even if it is held that the death is natural, in paragraph 61 of Naga People''s Movement of Human Rights'' case (supra), the Supreme Court has observed in the following manner:
"61. In order that the people may feel assured that there is an effective check against misuse or abuse of powers by the members of the armed forces it is necessary that a complaint containing an allegation about misuse or abuse of the powers conferred under the Central Act should be thoroughly inquired into and, if it is found that there is substance in the allegation, the victim should be suitably compensated by the state and the requisite sanction under Section 6 of the Central Act should be granted for institution of prosecution and/or a civil suit or other proceeding against the person/persons responsible for such violation."
It is also submitted that since violence was perpetuated on the deceased and he was kept in lockup for longer period than necessary, it amounts to violation of his life and liberty; therefore, the wife and children of the deceased have to be compensated.
The contentions raised in the petition give rise to the following questions for consideration:
(a) Whether the death of Laden Jidung is a custodial death on account of the violence perpetuated by the Assam Rifle personnel or a natural one?
(b) Whether the detention of Laden Jidung for longer period and it amounts to violation of human rights as per the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Naga People''s Movement of Human Rights'' case (supra) relating to Dos and Don''ts on the part of the Assam Rifles?
With regard to the first question, the post mortem report of GMC Hospital discloses that there was enlargement of heart with left ventricular hypertrophy. Weight 450 gm. Atherosclerotic changes are present in the coronary arteries. Atherosclerotic changes are present in the coronary arteries.
The medical dictionary defines Atherosclerosis as "Atherosclerosis is the buildup of a waxy plaque on the inside of blood vessels. Atherosclerosis is often called Atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis is a general term for hardening of the arteries. Atherosclerosis can occur in several forms, including Atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis, a progressive process responsible for most heart disease, is a type of Atherosclerosis or hardening of the arteries". Therefore, the report of GMC Hospital clearly discloses that on account of hardening of the arteries, the death is caused and rightly the medical opinion discloses that the death is a natural one and the injuries whatever referred to in the post mortem report of Haflong Hospital bear no nexus to the cause of death.
The report of the Additional District Magistrate contains the statement of Rajen Langthasa, who was picked up along with the deceased and both were kept in the lockup. Rajen Langthasa was handed over to police at 2 p.m. The statement of Rajen Langthasa as extracted above disclose that the said person and Laden Jidung both were taken and kept in lockup in the camp of the Assam Rifle. The statement does not make any reference of torture and violence inflicted during the night time and till the next day morning. His statement discloses that he was taken separately. His pant was removed, his legs were tied and he was interrogated. Around 2.00 p.m. Rajen Langthasa, Jitujit Nunisa and Johen Longmailai were handed over to the police custody of Haflong Police Station. His statement further discloses that he was separated from Laden Jidung at around 10.00 a.m. and he did not know as to how Laden Jidung was dealt with by Assam Rifle personnel. However, it is evident from the post mortem report of Haflong Civil Hospital that multiple linear bruise seen on the scapular region right side, multiple bruise mark on right arm (lateral aspect) and multiple linear bruise on back of both thighs and knees. Thus some bruise injury and lacerated marks were found in the legs, palm and ankle of Laden Jidung. This would suggest that a little amount of force might have used against the deceased.
The question would arise whether the Assam Rifle personnel were justified in keeping Laden Jidung in lockup overnight and whether it amounts to serious infraction of law, which renders the Assam Rifle and the State liable to pay compensation.
In this regard, from the facts and circumstances it could be noticed that Laden Jidung and Rajen Langthasa were only kept in lockup. There was no interrogation and no question of torture and third degree method during entire night. It is only in the morning, both were taken separately and interrogated. First Rajen Langthasa was taken and interrogated. The law mandates that whenever the Assam Rifle arrests a person for committing a crime, they should as far as possible handover the person to the police custody, not exceeding 24 hours depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case as laid down in Naga People''s Movement of Human Rights'' case (supra). Before the person is arrested and handed over to police custody, it is expected that Assam Rifle personnel, in law, should interrogate and collect whatever incriminating material available and along with such material, they have to handover the person to the local police with a complaint.
In this case, considering the facts and circumstances, Laden Jidung was arrested and some serious incriminating materials like pistol, mobile and other materials including some documents were found. As per the version of Rajen Langthasa, whole of the night they were not interrogated and in the morning he was interrogated. It is the version of Assam Rifle that while interrogating Laden Jidung, he was feeling uneasy he was taken to hospital where he was found dead. The detention of Laden Jidung under the circumstances cannot be considered as an unduly longer period so as to hold that the Assam Rifle violated the dictum laid down in the Naga People''s Movement of Human Rights'' case (supra). Therefore, there appears to be no justification to hold that Assam Rifles was in any way so cruel and illegal in dealing with Laden Jidung, which resulted in his death and it also cannot be held that they were not justified in handing over to police immediately after arresting within 2/3 hours without adequate and proper interrogation. In these circumstances, we find that there is no merit in the petition accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed.