Genuine Encounter or Custodial Killing: What Really Happened to Md Amin Malik at Tral SOG Camp?

According to J&K police, Malik was an active militant who snatched a police rifle while being questioned and had to be shot. According to his family, he was a labourer who voluntarily presented himself to the police for questioning.

Srinagar: On the night of June 2, Zahoor Ahmad, a 30-year-old resident of Machama hamlet in south Kashmir’s Tral in Pulwama district, received a phone call from the village watchman who asked him to take his mother to Tral police station immediately.

The police station was where Ahmad’s brother, 38-year-old Mohammad Amin Malik, had been in custody for questioning since May 29.

When they arrived at the police station, Ahmad’s mother was escorted to a police vehicle and driven to a Special Operations Group (SOG) camp some meters away. There she was told that Malik had snatched a rifle out of the hands of a policeman and that she must ask her son to surrender.

Ahmad’s mother told him later that she had called to Malik while still seated in the police vehicle which was at a distance from the building where, according to the police, Malik had run and taken shelter. But she received no response.

She apparently told Ahmad: “I told them to let me get out [of the vehicle] and I would ask my son to surrender. But they did not let me. I did not know whether there was anyone on the other side of the building or not.”

Confused, Ahmad’s mother repeatedly called to Malik to surrender, but continued to receive no response. Eventually, she was sent home.

The next morning, June 3, Ahmad went to the police station to ask what had happened with his brother. The policemen on duty told him to go home because the search operation for Malik was still going on. “Your family will be informed when something develops,” the policemen told Ahmad.

As Ahmad spoke with the policemen, he received a phone call from a relative who informed him that Malik had been killed while in police custody and that his body had already been taken to the police control room in Srinagar.

Malik’s story: Police version

According to the Jammu and Kashmir police, Malik was an active militant and had been killed in an overnight encounter on the night of June 2/3 after he snatched a service rifle (AK-47) from a policeman and fired indiscriminately around the room.

“Mohammad Amin Malik, son of Abdul Ahad Malik of Nagbal Machhma, Tral, an active (militant) operative was neutralised in an overnight operation on 2/3 June, jointly conducted by Awantipora Police, 180 battalion CRPF and 42 RR of army at Police Component Complex, Tral,” a police spokesperson told the media soon after the alleged encounter had ended.

Also read: UN Experts Ask India for Clarifications on Human Rights Violations Against 3 Kashmiri Men

The police spokesperson added that Malik had been arrested on May 30 and had possessed “incriminating materials viz. arms, ammunition and explosives including unlicensed 12 bore gun, live rounds, explosives, iron/steel balls, 9 feature phones and other warlike stores used in fabrication of IEDs”. He had been taken to the Tral police station where “a case FIR No. 48/2021 under relevant sections of law was registered”.

The police spokesperson said: “The operative (militant) was on police remand and on June 2, 2021, he was brought from the Police Station, Tral, to the Police Component, Tral, for further interrogation. During the interrogation (he) got hold of the service rifle (AK-47) of CT (constable) Amjad Khan and fired indiscriminately with the intention to kill the police personnel.”

Malik wounded Amjad Khan “critically”, the police statement said

The police spokesperson added: “He (Malik) then took total control of the interrogation room and engaged the police personnel by firing intermittently from the snatched weapon. Sensing grave danger to the lives of police personnel and that of the (militant) operative, his mother and the executive magistrate were brought on the site and sincere and repeated efforts were made to persuade him to throw down the weapon and surrender.”

Malik apparently not only refused to surrender, but continued to fire upon the police party. “One of the police personnel was hit with a bullet on the chest and survived because of the bulletproof jacket he was wearing,” the spokesperson said.

Eventually, said the spokesperson, after all efforts to persuade Malik to surrender had failed, he was engaged in a gunfight “following the rules and SoP of such engagement and was neutralised.”

Malik’s story: Family version

Malik’s family has an entirely different story about Malik’s arrival in police custody. On May 23, they told The Wire, their house had been cordoned off by a contingent of forces from the army, police and paramilitary. According to Ahmad, when the security forces personnel entered the house, they were “furious and started ransacking everything”. Malik meanwhile slipped away quietly and returned only when the forces had left the house.

“They turned everything upside down and asked for Malik,” said Ahmad. When they left, they told the family to bring Malik to the police station. Later, the police claimed they had recovered an unlicensed gun and some incriminating material including bleaching powder from Malik’s home.

“They recovered a decades-old, rusted hunting rifle (toppe bundook) from our house,” said Ahmad. “My father was a hunter. He used to hunt animals in the nearby forests. After his death, we preserved the rifle in his memory. It had broken clips and dismembered barrels.”

The bleaching powder the police had taken with them after the raid at Malik’s home had been used for fishing and weeding, Ahmad added.

Also read: Kashmir: Elderly, Ailing People Detained Under Public Safety Act Don’t Get Proper Medical Care

On the night of May 23, after the police and army had left the house, Malik returned. “He saw everything turned upside-down and the sight sent chills down his spine,” said Ahmad. “They (the forces) had let their sniffer dogs into our stored rations including rice, tea and other eatables, so we had to throw away our rations. A tin shed erected in the courtyard had also been demolished.”

The family told Malik that the police had ordered him to report to the police station. Malik was reluctant to do so. He knew that getting involved in police matters would never be easy. But his family, including his mother and wife, persuaded him to go since he had done nothing illegal.

“In fact he had doubts about how the police would react to the recovery of the old hunting gun,” said Ahmad. “But we told him that police would understand our emotions behind keeping this old rifle.”

The family also approached an intermediary to talk to the police. According to Ahmad, the deputy superintendent of police who had spoken with the intermediary had sworn upon his own two children that the police would keep Malik in custody for two or three days for questioning and then release him safe and sound.

On May 29, Ahmad and another person accompanied Malik to the Tral police station. The deputy superintendent of police apparently questioned Malik in isolation for some time and then handed him to the SOG.

On May 31, Ahmad went to the police station to meet his brother. Malik was fine. But the deputy superintendent of police asked Ahmad to tell his brother to hand over the arms he possessed or else he would be jailed.

When Ahmad told his brother what the deputy superintendent of police had said, Malik told him: “Am I a fool? If I had something like this do you think I would have come to the police station? I have nothing like this.”

On June 1, Malik’s wife and 70-year-old mother went to meet him at the police station. They later told Ahmad that when two policemen brought Malik to the visitors’ room, Malik had been limping. There was very little conversation between Malik, his mother and his wife.

“They told me when they returned home that Malik had been in pain. He told them his whole body was aching,” Ahmad said.

Worried, Ahmad went to the police station on June 2 to see Malik for himself. Although he was turned away at first, he was somehow allowed to meet his brother. The person Malik had become by June 2 was the opposite of what he had been on May 31, the day Ahmad had met him last. Malik now looked exhausted, lost and wrecked. As Ahmad approached him, Malik broke down and said that he had been tortured.

“He could not fold his hands; his wrists were swollen,” Ahmad told The Wire.

Malik apparently told Ahmad that a police officer had twisted his legs while he was seated in a chair and broken his knee. All Ahmad could do was try and console Malik by telling him he would soon be free.

After the encounter

According to Ahmad, the police had told an untruth in the story they had shared with the media about Malik’s arrest.

“It is a lie that Malik was arrested,” said Ahmad. “The fact is that we, his family, had taken him to the police station because they had told us he needed to be questioned. If Malik had plans to join the militancy, then he would not have handed himself over to the police.”

Malik’s family had also presented him to the police on May 29, whereas the police said Malik had been in their custody since May 30.

In 2002, Malik had joined the Hizb-ul- Mujahideen as a militant.  But in 2003, he had formally surrendered and since then had been working as a labourer. Another brother, Shabir Ahmad Malik, had also been a militant, serving with the Al Qaidaaffiliated Ansar Ghazwatul Hind (AGuH) militant outfit until he was killed in June 2019.

Also read: Sudden Arrests, No Information: J&K Residents Learn About UAPA the Hard Way

Malik is survived by his wife and two sons, one 14 years old, the other seven.

“We do not know what happened inside the police camp but we are sure that our brother was a labourer and not a militant,” Ahmad said. He claims that Malik’s body was taken by the police and buried at an undisclosed location.

“We were not even taken for my brother’s last rites and we do not know where they have buried my brother,” he said.

The Wire adds from New Delhi:

Encounter raises unanswered questions

Based on what the police and family had said about the death of Mohammad Amin Malik, The Wire’s Delhi bureau asked a former central paramilitary force officer to offer his assessment of the official account.  “The story is unbelievable,” he said, requesting anonymity because of the government’s recent gag order on retired security and intelligence officials.

According to the officer, there are several holes in the claims made by the police.

“In the first place, if you had reasons to believe that the man is dangerous and given to violence (what else could you determine from the alleged seizure/recovery?), the law permits you to handcuff him or even put him under irons or fetters after obtaining due permission from the magistrate who granted the police remand,” the officer told The Wire.

He continued: “What was the necessity of someone standing so close to him that the accused could snatch his rifle? Why was Amjad Khan so careless with his rifle? We are made to believe that a dangerous terrorist took control of the interrogation room. How? This needs investigation.”

According to the officer, it would have been difficult for a lone man to take control of the interrogation room. “What happened to the interrogator?” the officer asked. “Usually more than one person is involved in an interrogation. And because they claim it (the arrest of Malik) was a joint operation of the SOG, CRPF and the RR, it follows that their officers must also have been present. If they were not present, why not? Usually, Intelligence Bureau officers are also present… Joint interrogation has been the standard practice since the last 33 years.”

The officer also suggested that the scene be recreated so that the sequence of events could be confirmed.

“From which place was he (Malik) firing? Obviously, he could not have closed the door. Had he closed [the door], how would he fire? This means the door was open. This also means that he would have to, at times, lean out of the door to fire, unless he was firing in one direction only,” said the officer.

He added: “Even if we accept that this so happened, the forces have got both hand grenades and under barrel grenade launcher rifle grenades. The simplest thing would have been to lob a grenade inside. In fact, in a room, even tear gas grenades or stun (flash and bang) grenades would have been very effective. Tral has been a hotbed [of militancy] and all such things have been routinely available there with all the forces.”

The officer also questioned the logic of the police claims.

“They would like the nation to believe that even as a terrorist had launched a murderous assault on a constable, they were still thinking in terms of getting him to surrender on the appeal of his mother? This shows that the operation, if at all conducted, was a most unprofessional one,” he said.

The Wire also asked a former Intelligence Bureau official with extensive field experience in the Valley if it is standard operating procedure for police constables to carry their weapon into interrogation when a suspect is not physically restrained with handcuffs. “It is true that many police personnel carrying AKs keep moving around while the suspect is being interrogated,” he said. “The problem is lack of gun discipline and over confidence. I have seen many times an AK hanging loosely from the shoulders of police personnel.”

But he added, “If [the sequence of events as narrated by the family] is correct, which seems so, it is a fake encounter. Perhaps, the poor fellow died during interrogation and the whole story is being made up.”

The Wire has asked the police to provide more details about the “critical” injuries sustained by constable Amjad, whose AK-47 was allegedly snatched, and the treatment he is undergoing, and will update this story when it receives a response.

Umar Mukhtar is a Srinagar-based journalist working with Kashmir Life. He tweets at @umarmukhtaar.

Naxals Kill Three in Maharashtra’s Gadchiroli for Working as ‘Police Informers’

The villagers claim this was a “warning message” sent out to prevent them from working for the police in the future.

Mumbai: On April 22, 2018, the Maharashtra state police killed 40 persons, including several teenage boys and girls, in Kasansur village of Gadchiroli district in Maharashtra, on the basis that they were “armed rebels” of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist).

Nine months later, on January 21, the Naxals “retaliated” and killed three persons in Kasansur for allegedly working as “police informers”.

Calling it “retaliatory action”, the Naxals have reportedly taken responsibility of killing the three – Maalu Dogge Madavi, Kannu Rainu Madavi and Lalsu Kudyetti – on the intervening night of January 21 and 22.

The three, all in their mid-30s, along with six other villagers were allegedly summoned into the forest, a few kilometres outside the village on January 21. While the three persons were shot dead, the rest were allowed to return on the condition that they get everyone to vacate the village immediately.

The Naxals left behind handwritten papers next to each body and a red banner with a message stating:

“On April 22, 2018, in Kasansur-Tumingunda incident, 40 of our beloved comrades were killed by the police. These three men worked as police informers and we have given them a death sentence as a punishment for their crime.”

The banner has been undersigned by the ‘South Gadchiroli Division Committee’.

Also read: One of 40 ‘Naxals’ Killed in ‘Encounter’ Was Child, Say Villagers, 7 More Missing

The locals have confirmed that on January 21, the Naxals had summoned the three deceased persons, along with six others to a deserted spot. “They had come in large numbers. They let go of the six others but asked Maalu, Kannu and Lalsu to stay back. They asked the six others to return to the village and vacate the houses. A few hours later, the bodies of the three persons were found lying few kilometres away from the village on the Bhamragad-Allapalli road,” said one of the villagers.

This act has left the villagers horrified and they claim it was a “warning message” sent out to prevent them from working for the police in the future.

As a practice, the Naxal leaders usually call for a “Jan Sunvai (public court)” every time they sense the villagers are not abiding by their orders. In this case, a villager said, no such Jan Sunvai was organised. “It appears the Maoists were quite sure of the role played by the deceased persons. These men along with the six others were summoned, and without any conversation, were punished (killed),” a villager told The Wire.

Villagers of Gattepalli recognise a 16-year who was killed in Gadchiroli last April. Credit: File photo/Sukanya Shantha/The Wire

Kasansur is a remote village situated in a dense forest in the border district of Gadchiroli. Only 32 families – all belonging to the Madiya tribe – live here. The river Indrawati passes through the village and on crossing the river, one enters into Bijapur district of neighbouring Chattisgarh. Both districts are Naxal-affected and have witnessed several bloodied exchanges between the armed rebels and the police.

The villagers confirmed that since the attack on January 21, they have taken shelter in the Tadgaon armed outpost of Bhamragad police station. “Over 160 villagers have moved to the police station. Even those six persons who were abducted and later released are at the police station,” confirmed advocate Lalsu Soma Nagoti, a Zilla Parishad member.

Credit: Ita Mehrotra

The bodies have been sent for post-mortem and will be handed over to the families only after all the formalities are concluded. A senior police official said the security of other family members is their prime concern. “We are ensuring that others are safe. They are all panicked. Once things have settled, we will be questioning the six others and find out more details about the attack,” a senior police official handling the anti-Naxal operations, said.   

On April 22, last year, the district police’s C-60 commandos (the Maharashtra police’s special anti-Naxal unit) claimed to have carried out two “successful ambush [operations],” which were planned and executed at Kasansur, where 34 people were killed, and a day later at the nearby Rajaram-Khandla forest, where six more were killed. 

Three crucial commandos of the Naxal groups – Sainath alias Dolesh Madhi Atram (32), the alleged commander of Permelli Dalam (who, according to the police, was recently elevated as the divisional committee member) from Gattepalli, division committee (popularly known as ‘DVC’), rank-level member Naxal Srinu alias Srinath, and Nandu – were among those killed in the ambush. Besides them, six were assistant commandants, four party committee members and rest were party members.

When The Wire visited Gatepalli village five days after the incident, it was found that most people among the deceased were, in fact, school- going children. Some children were as young as 13. They, according to the villagers, had travelled from Gattepalli – a tiny hamlet in Gadchiroli – to Kasansur village for a wedding.

Also read: Were There Civilians Among ‘Naxals’ Killed in the Gadchiroli ‘Encounter’?

At Kasansur, talking to The Wire soon after the incident, the villagers said the marriage had saved the villagers from police firing. “When they [Naxals] summon us, we have to oblige. There is no choice. That morning too, we were called. But as we were getting ready for a wedding ceremony in the village; we were exempted. The wedding saved our lives,” one of the villagers, Lachchu Matte Wadavi, told this reporter on April 27, last year.

The Gattepalli villagers had complained of police excess and alleged that the children were wrongly targeted. The police claimed that the wedding was just a cover and the young boys and girls were, in fact, fresh recruits. However, the police were unable to establish how school-going children could have participated in an armed movement.

One of 40 ‘Naxals’ Killed in ‘Encounter’ Was Child, Say Villagers, 7 More Missing

After 40 persons were killed in an alleged encounter between the C-60 commandos and Naxals in Maharashtra’s Gadchiroli, a village waits to identify their dead even as the media smears their missing children as outlaws.

This is the first article in a two-part series on the aftermath of the reported killings of 40 ‘Naxals’ in Gadchiroli, Maharashtra.

Gattepalli (Maharashtra): For five days, the residents of Gattepalli, a tiny hamlet in Gadchiroli Maharashtra, had no idea where many of their children had disappeared after they had gone to attend a wedding in a nearby village on April 21. When the tragic news finally came, it was by accident.

“Oh, is that Raasu? But her cheeks look swollen in this picture. Look at the forehead closely, she had an exceptionally broad forehead and small eyes,” said Bisru Ataram in Madiya language as he peered – almost by chance – into the mobile phone of a visitor, advocate Lalsu Soma Nagoti.

On the evening of April 27, Ataram accidentally saw and recognised the photo of one of the children – it was 16-year-old Raasu Chacko Madavi. In shock, he immediately shared the news. The photo was part of the list of 16 people who had been killed in an encounter with the police for being suspected Naxals just a few days ago.

For Raasu’s sisters – Vanji, 20, and Jano, 18 – it was a traumatic moment as the news sank in. It was equally distressing for other villagers who had been waiting for some sort of official confirmation from the police after they had heard of the encounter.

Vanji (second from left) and Jano (centre) identify their 16-year-old sister Raasu Chacko Madavi in the picture. Credit: Sukanya Shantha/The Wire

Their worst fears had now come true.

Raasu’s picture was number five in the list issued by the police. She was classified as “an unidentified person” who had been in the alleged “encounter” on the banks of Indravati river on April 22.

Her swollen face with deep gashes on the cheeks and swollen left eye had deformed her face to a large extent. But the villagers had seen Raasu since she was a baby. They could identify that face with “broad forehead and small eyes” in no time.

In the darkness, the villagers then feverishly scrolled through the PDF page on Nagoti’s phone to see if they could spot any more familiar faces. They discussed if another picture, marked as Shavh #10 (dead body number 10) could be that of another missing teenage boy, Nusse.

But they couldn’t tell for sure. “The face is too swollen, as if the person was badly beaten. Some features match those of our son Nusse, but we can’t be sure,” Ataram said.

No official confirmation about their children’s whereabouts or deaths had come so far, barring an inquiry by C-60 commandos of the police who had visited the village following a missing persons complaint the villagers had filed with the police in nearby Gadchiroli.

The encounter

Gattepalli is a remote and tiny village in Etapalli tehsil, around 310 km from Nagpur. Like in most tribal villages in Gadchiroli region, the 35 families of Gattepalli are dependent on Tendu leaves and other forest produce for their sustenance.

Credit: Ita Mehrotra

The concrete roads slowly give way to dusty paths the closer one gets to the village. Irregular state and private bus services connect the outer world only up to Etapalli town, 66 km away. The journey beyond can be completed only on a sturdy bike and the two-hour back-breaking journey is challenging, especially at night. Given its remoteness and lack of public transport, the villagers here seldom travel to town. Only a few families here own motorcycles which are generously shared with everyone.

The teenage Rassu and seven others, none older than 21, had left home on the evening of April 21 saying they were going to Kasansur village, 15 km away, to participate in a wedding. According to advocate Nagoti, himself a Madiya, a wedding in the tribe is considered an open house of sorts-it is quite common to find uninvited guests from neighbouring villages participate in the pre-wedding ceremonies. Participation of unfamiliar faces, Nagoti says, is just as welcome as that of any relative. According to the testimonies collected from villagers in Kasansur, these eight persons never reached the marriage venue. “There is a possibility that these persons had left the village to join the wedding party but were either summoned by the Naxals camping outside the village or were forcibly taken by the police to the spot and attacked,” said Nagoti, a member of the Gadchiroli zila parishad.

Then came news of two “successful ambush, planned and executed by Gadchiroli district’s C-60 commandos (the Maharashtra police’s special anti-Naxal unit); 40 people were reported death. According to the police, two days before the encounters, security agencies had received precise information about the Naxal movement in the region.

On April 22, in the forest area surrounding Kasansur in Gadchiroli — which geographically falls in Chattisgarh’s Pengunda village in Bijapur district — the C-60 commandos had opened fire on a “group of Naxals” who had allegedly been camping there for a few hours. In all, 34 were killed in the firing. A day later, at the nearby Rajaram-Khandla forest, six more, including a senior member described as Nandu, were killed.

As reported by The Hindu, K. Vijay Kumar, senior security advisor, Ministry of Home Affairs, claimed these encounters were perhaps one of the biggest operations in terms of the number of Maoists killed in the recent years.

A long wait

The villagers of Gattepalli say they hadn’t heard anything about the encounters. They waited until the end of April 22 for their children to return. When they did not, the eight families travelled around 140 km the next day to visit the police headquarters in Gadchiroli. 

No information was forthcoming. Talking to The Wire correspondent, the villagers had a lot of questions. “Why did they (police) not tell us when we visited them on Tuesday (April 24),” asked one. “Eight people – one from each family – are in Gadchiroli right now for their DNA tests. The police could have just shown us the list and we could have at least identified and rested (cremated) our child by now. This is cruel beyond comprehension,” said another. The mood was one of despondency, at the lack of any information and at the way events had unfolded.

On April 24, the villagers had approached the police headquarters in Gadchiroli and had filed a missing persons complaint. The police, the villagers claimed, took down every detail and asked the family members to return the next day. By then, the list of names and photos were already released by the police for the media.

“Instead of showing the list to us, they took us to the mortuary and asked us to recognise our children among the bodies. Those bodies were wrapped in thick polythene bags and only the faces were left open,” said 29-year old Bijja Chundu Madavi. The bodies, Bijja claimed, were strewn about in a “very hot room” and emitted a foul smell. “The faces had decomposed completely and we failed to recognise anyone,” Bijja added. Now the families are waiting for the DNA tests to confirm that the dead are indeed the village’s children.

Bijja’s 16-year-old brother Mangesh is one of the eight persons to have left the village with Rassu that evening. Mangesh, a class 11 student at the nearby Bhagwantrao Arts and Science college in Ettapalli had returned home only a few days ago. “It was a residential programme. After finishing his class 10, we sent him there for higher education,” Bijja said. “He is a good student,” he said, and then corrected to “he was a good student”.

A day after The Wire visited the village, Gadchiroli’s superintendent of police Abhinav Deshmukh confirmed one of the bodies had been identified by the villagers. Though he could not confirm the name of the deceased, he said, “The families had come to Gadchiroli (police headquarters) and identified one of the eight missing persons. The body was handed over to the family on April 28. We would be able to confirm other identities after receiving the DNA test reports.”

Several versions of the killings have appeared in local papers, all depending on the statements issued by different police officers from time to time. Earlier the eight were identified as “deadly armed rebels”. Their age, names and village were not disclosed. But once the families approached the police, another version of the story was put out. The police claimed these eight youth were a part of the new recruits who had come to the village to “meet their commander” for the first time.

According to the police, 34 “armed rebels” gathered on the banks of Indravati river were killed in an alleged encounter between the C-60 commandos and Naxals. Credit: Sukanya Shantha/The Wire

Since Sainath alias Dolesh Madhi Atram (32), the alleged commander of Permelli Dalam (who, according to the police, was recently elevated as the divisional committee member) is also was from Guttepalli village, the story had ready takers and both the regional language and the English media published the police’s version

The villagers say they know whenever someone is getting ready to join Naxal groups. “When Sainath left home some ten-15 years ago, we knew he was not going to ever return. If these children were to join the rebels too, they would not have taken the risk of leaving in a group,” said an elderly person. Sainath, according to the police record, joined the movement in 2004 and had over 75 criminal cases against him including murder and abduction. The police claimed there was a reward of Rs 16 lakh on his head.

Each family member that this reporter spoke to claimed that the youth had carried a bag with them which contained their fineries in it. They also claimed that none of them had earlier gone missing, something that could indicate if they had come in contact with the Naxals and had participated in the movement in some form.

For tribals in the Naxal-affected area, the only way to establish their “legitimate identity” is by possessing as many active legal documents as possible. Tribals here protect their legal documents like Aadhar card and voting card dearly. Since most of those who went missing were still minors, the only official document they possessed were their Aadhaar cards – a few, like in Mangesh’s case, had college IDs.

According to the villagers, the police took away all the Aadhar cards claiming these were necessary for further investigation. This has raised fears of tampering with evidence. “Now we will have no legal documents to counter whatever claims the police makes.”

Gadchiroli’s SP Deshmukh claimed that slain Naxal leader Sainath was in touch with the children. “In our preliminary investigation, we have found that these youths were in touch with Sainath. He had been visiting the village and meeting them. It is likely that Sainath had traveled with them to the spot of the encounter,” Deshmukh told The Wire.

Nagoti along with the villagers is now seeking independent inquiry into the killing. “Whether a part of the movement or not, this cold-blooded murder of such young children cannot be justified. They have snatched an entire generation from us. Only a non-partial, independent inquiry can ensure families of the deceased get justice,” he said.

This tiny and remote village is in a state of gloom, having lost so many of its children. Compounding that is official apathy and lack of communication from the authorities. But worse is not being able to counter the official version that has been spread and reported by the media, which has branded their young children as outlaws.