Mumbai: Over eight months ago, a 36-year-old undertrial prisoner was brutally killed inside Jalgaon sub-jail in Maharashtra. The prisoner, Ravindra Jagtap, was allegedly brutally beaten up by five prison officials – including the prison superintendent. The severity of the violence was explicitly captured in the autopsy report which showed 20 “fresh contusions” all over his body and a team of three doctors conclusively determined that the death was a result of a “blunt trauma” caused to his chest.
Over a dozen witnesses – a prison official and several co-prisoners – have accused the prison officials of brutalising Jagtap, leading to his almost immediate death. But eight months on, the state prison department has initiated no action against the accused prison officials. Worse, they continue to serve at the same prison and have complete access to both the crime scene and official records. Several witnesses in the case, however, have been shunted to faraway prisons for going against the department and the erring officers.
Japtap, an undertrial prisoner was arrested on September 7 last year after he had allegedly got into a brawl with a gang of men in his locality. Jagtap, who was ailing with pulmonary and stomach tuberculosis, was sent to Jalgaon prison soon after, where he was lodged at a separate ward. A detailed statement submitted by one of the constables, who worked at Jalgaon prison until the incident and was soon moved out to a prison in Marathwada region, claimed that Jagtap had accidentally spilled water on the circle jailor Jitendra Mali while consuming his medicines.
Ravindra Jagtap. Photo: special arrangement.
Angered by this incident, Mali allegedly brutalised Jagtap. Other prison officials – Anna Kisan Kakad, Arvind Patil, Datta Khot – also allegedly joined Mali, the constable claimed in his testimony. The constable has also claimed that the then jail superintendent Petras Gaikwad too had joined them in the attack. Gaikwad, who was on a temporary deputation at Jalgaon prison was transferred to Dhule prison. The reason, however, the department claims was administrative and not related to the allegations against him.
Not just the constable but many other prisoners, who were lodged in cells close by, claimed to have witnessed the attack. These witnesses have stayed firm and have repeated their testimonies before both the internal inquiry headed by a class I superintendent level officer and a district magistrate, who is inquiring into the incident as mandated under section 176 (1A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
‘Enough evidence’
Besides the two inquires, Jagtap’s wife, Meenabai, a 35-year-old semi-literate woman, has also moved the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court seeking a First Information Report (FIR) against the erring officials. She was helped by a prison constable Anil Burkul, who has been actively raising his voice against the violations in prison. Meenabai says since the jail officials have made several attempts to silence her, she decided to add Burkul as a co-petitioner in the case before the high court.
“There is enough evidence to show my husband was brutalised in jail. There are independent testimonies too. But the prison department has refused to initiate any action,” Meenabai told The Wire. Her petition has sought an FIR under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused officials. The petition, her lawyer Dhananjay Mane said, had come up for hearing twice this year. But as the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic intensified in the state, the high court has only been looking at urgent matters. The death of a prisoner in a brutal attack is not classified as an “urgent matter”.
When cases of custodial violence and murder are taken to court, seldom do they end up with criminal action being initiated against the erring officers. At best, the courts direct the states to pay compensation to the victims. Here, Meenabai says that money is not what she wants from the state or the accused. “They killed a young man, a father of two young children. I am widowed at 35. I am seeking answers for the wrong done to me… it is a criminal wrong.”
Meenabai shared the anguish she was made to go through to just find out about her husband’s death. Jagtap was killed on September 11 but Meenabai found out about it only a day later. “I had visited the prison hoping to see my husband on September 12. The prison guard shooed me away. A little later, one man from the vicinity informed me that my husband was killed in jail and was taken to the Jalgaon civil hospital. I rushed there and saw his lifeless body in the hospital.”
According to Meenabai, Jagptap’s body had already stiffened when it was brought to the hospital. “Every inch of his body was covered with black and blue marks. His clothes were torn, hair was disheveled. The body appeared like he had died several hours ago,” Meenabai said.
Autopsy report
The post mortem conducted at the Government Medical College in Jalgaon by the three-member team – Dr. Vaibhav Sonar, professor and head of forensic medicine and toxicology, Dr. Rahul Jadhav, assistant professor and Dr. Sandip Patil, medical officer – submitted a detailed report describing each injury on Jagtap’s body. Among the 21 injuries listed, one injury that was seen on the back of his neck was around “1-3 days old” and 19 injuries – including those on his head, chest, shoulders, arms and thighs – were freshly inflicted. One injury, on the abdomen, was an outcome of the incision made at the time of the autopsy. The Wire tried to contact the doctors for their response on the findings submitted in the report but they refused to comment.
The autopsy report citing “blunt trauma to chest” as the cause for Ravindra Jagtap’s death.
The medical findings match the testimony of the constable, who is a prime witness in the case. The constable, who was on duty in the close by circle, has claimed that, after hearing the commotion, he stepped out and saw jailor Mali kick Jagtap with his boots. The witness has also claimed that the attack continued for several minutes and was repeated a few hours later again in the evening.
‘Refusal to initiate action against erring officials’
The witness, besides submitting a signed affidavit to the prisons department, and collector’s office, has also testified before a judicial magistrate. His affidavit is also a part of the petition that Meenabai has filed before the high court. “They pushed him on the ground and took turns to hit him,” the jail official, a prime witness in the case, has stated.
The judicial magistrate took over two weeks to record statements and Meenabai was allowed to sit through the proceedings. “Each one of them have told the court what they say. My husband was mercilessly beaten up and they described the entire incident. I heard it being narrated over and over again,” she said.
Exposing the prison department comes at a huge price. The constable, in his written statement, has claimed that soon after the incident, he was forced to approach Meenabai and “settle the matter”. An offer of Rs 50,000 was to be made. But the witness refused. He was unceremoniously moved out to a prison 400 kilometers away. Some prisoners who have testified have also been moved to faraway prisons. Meenabai says “local goons” have been hired to intimidate her and force her to withdraw her case. But she is resolved to fight this till the end, she says.
Custodial violence and deaths have become a common phenomenon in prisons in Maharashtra. But even more common is the blatant refusal to initiate action against the erring officials. The apex court, National Human Rights Commission and the Law Commission have on several occasions issued directions and guidelines on how to handle cases of custodial violence. But states have always tried to save their men in uniform, forcing victims to take the long, arduous legal route for justice.
This is not the only case of prison violence in the state where clinching evidence was available against the jail staff but the prison department has also continued to drag its feet. Around the same time as Jagtap’s murder, another 32- year-old life-convict, Asghar Ali Mansoori, had killed himself by suicide inside Nashik central prison. He was allegedly ill-treated by several jail officials.
Fearing that his suicide note would be destroyed, he had wrapped it in polythene and swallowed it. This case too has damning evidence, with several witnesses. The family, in this case too, has moved the Bombay high court, but the prison department has not initiated any action against the accused officials. They continue to serve at the same prison and the witnesses continue to complain of ill-treatment meted out to them in jail for speaking up.
A senior prison official, who is privy to the several investigations continuing in the matter, said that the preliminary inquiry in the case has been concluded and the report has been submitted to the additional director general (prisons) Sunil Ramanand. “The report has been submitted but no case has been registered. The department is still looking into it,” a senior official told The Wire, on the condition of anonymity.
The officer further added that since there are multiple investigations being carried out, and not all of them are completed, no action has been initiated. When asked about the conclusive autopsy report, he said, “The autopsy report is a part of an investigation. We cannot reach a conclusion until the investigation is completed.”