Militants146; 145;surrender146;: Identity crisis in court

Even as two of the five youths allegedly paraded by the Assam Rifles AR as surrendered militants last month were released...

Even as two of the five youths allegedly paraded by the Assam Rifles AR as surrendered militants last month were released on personal bonds following an interim order from the Gauhati High Court, controversy shrouded the origin of a third who had been produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Chandel district along with the duo. Two others have been remanded to police custody till May 3.

Five petitions had been filed before the Imphal Bench of the high court on April 25 by the parents of five youth, who they claimed had been lured into pretending to be militants and enacting a 8220;surrender drama8221; in front of mediapersons by the AR, on March 13, in lieu of recruitment into the AR.

In response, the Imphal Bench had ordered the AR to transfer custody of these five youth to civil police. On March 13, nine persons had surrendered their arms and ammunition to GOC, 3 Corps, Lt Gen Z U Shah at a 8220;surrender ceremony8221; in the presence of the media. On Thursday, in accordance with the court directive, two youth were handed over to Heingang PS, while three others were produced before the CJM, Chandel.

In court, parents of the two youth 8212; H Ingo and H Lemba 8212; claimed their wards. Both Ingo and Lemba were allowed to leave after furnishing personal bonds of Rs 10,000 each on accord of having surrendered to the 37 AR with illegal arms and ammunition. Following their release, both youths held a press conference here late last evening, in which they recounted how they had been lured by one Y Somananda on the promise of AR recruitment, and made to enact the role of 8216;surrenderees8217;.

However, in the case of the third, who has been named as H Momocha 17 in the petition and said to have been given the 8220;fictitious name8221; of Th Mantri Singh s/o late Th Chaoba by the AR, the person produced before the CJM was aged 33 years and stuck to his 8220;AR name8221; and antecedents, and preferred to stay on with the AR as a 8216;surrenderee8217;. Both petitioner and surrenderee failed to recognise each other.

Today, Mantri Singh said his name wasn8217;t Momocha as stated in the petition, and that the petitioner H Nilachandra Singh was not his 8220;natural father8221; as stated in the petition. This has been recorded in the CJM8217;s order.

A similar identity crisis presented itself when 8216;surrenderee8217; Ravikumar, named in the petition as H Ingo, first told the CJM that his father8217;s name was late Selon, and then changed it to H Tompok. Selon, he explained, was his father8217;s elder brother8217;s name. Interestingly, his father8217;s name according to the AR is late Selon, while the petition has been filed by his 8220;natural father8221; H Tompok Singh. This fumble, too, is recorded in Ingo8217;s release order.

Story continues below this ad

Counsel for the petitioners Rakesh Meihoubam said the AR had failed to produce Momocha Singh and had produced 8220;someone else8221; instead. 8220;Momocha8217;s father H Nilachandra clarified that this was not his son. We are now planning to file a separate application to apprise the court of the circumstances surrounding Momocha8217;s disappearance.8221;

A Joint Action Committee formed in support of the five youth has warned of mass protests if Momocha is not produced before the civil authorities. The AR is now alleging 8220;false submissions8221; in the petititions, and are maintaining that all nine militants at the March 13 8220;surrender ceremony8221; surrendered to them in February-March, of their own volition, and are to be rehabilitated after the screening process by the state police.

Senior AR officers also said there was no provision for 8220;recruiting8221; surrenderees into the AR. However, surrenderees may be recruited into the police commando force or the India Reserve Battalion on being found suitable, they said.