Four policemen facing contempt-of-court charges in the Kheda flogging case submitted in the Gujarat High Court on Wednesday that hitting people on their buttocks would not constitute custodial torture and requested that they be directed to pay compensation rather than being given punishment, which they argued would affect their careers. The policemen—AV Parmar, DB Kumavat, Laxmansinh Kanaksinh Dabhi and Rajubhai Dabhi—are facing contempt charges for violating the law enunciated by the Supreme Court in the DK Basu versus the state of West Bengal case. Five men—Jahirmiya Malek (62), Maksudabanu Malek (45), Sahadmiya Malek (23), Sakilmiya Malek (24) and Shahidraja Malek (25)—were publicly flogged by the four policemen last year in Kheda district. They moved the court last year seeking that 13 police officers should be “punished for contempt and non-compliance” of the apex court's directions in the DK Basu case that provide guidelines to be followed by police during arrest and detention. It was submitted before a bench of Justices AS Supehia and Gita Gopi, that if the four policemen are found guilty of contempt, the court may award appropriate compensation, instead of punishment. They submitted that the police officers had completed 10-15 years of service and punishment would affect their careers. The court asked the petitioners’ counsel, senior advocate I H Syed, to take instructions on the police officers’ proposal, and kept the next hearing on October 16. AV Parmar, who was identified from the videos examined by a magistrate in Nadiad as the person in a white shirt and blue jeans who was seen hitting the buttocks of Sahadmiya, Sakilmiya and Shahidraja with a stick, submitted that “giving three or six stick blows on buttock”, though not acceptable, “would not constitute custodial torture” so as to punish him for contempt of court. DB Kumavat, a police sub-inspector with the parole and furlough squad in Kheda, was identified as the man in a light blue shirt and black pants who was seen sitting on a chair while the victims were publicly flogged. He submitted that while “sitting in the chair and standing in the background, though not proper acceptable,” would not constitute custodial torture. A similar submission was made by Kanaksinh Laxmansinh Dabhi, a head constable at the Vadtal police station in Kheda, who was identified as holding a white pipe and pushing the victims towards a van. Rajubhai Dabhi, a constable at Dakor in Kheda, was identified as holding the hands of the victims as they were beaten by Parmar. The four policemen also tendered an unconditional apology before the court even as they contended that they had “acted within the scope and ambit” of their powers and “in discharge” of their duties. They also submitted that the flogging was not “done with any criminal intent” but to “prevent any kind of communal riots or any kind of communal turmoil or communal unrest among the residents of the said village”. They also requested that the contempt proceedings against them be dropped as they were already facing departmental inquiries as well as proceedings in the State Human Rights Commission in connection with the incident.
