Fake encounter: Joint Op was on Anantnag SSP's

http://indianexpress.com/story/4462.html#
Fake encounter: Joint Op was on Anantnag SSP's> information: Brig Saxena; Army plans to appeal against> trial, suggest court martial
Digging up the Pathribal truth> Related Stories> > Records show J-K police had big role in 2000 fake> encounter For own survival, J-K govt hushed up sex> scandal two years agoBar Association plea gets PIL> treatment Prostitution legal in J&K, govt plans to> scrap old law J-K sex racket: BSF begins internal> probe> > NEW DELHI, MAY 14: With the CBI filing chargesheets> against five Army officers in the fake Pathribal> encounter and the case listed for hearing on May 24 in> a Srinagar court, Army Headquarters plans to ask the> court to let them hold a court martial instead of> subjecting the officers to a trial after a CBI probe.> > The Indian Express has learnt that Brigadier Ajay> Saxena, the seniormost officer named as an accused by> the CBI, has written a letter to Lt General Madan> Gopal, Director General of Military Operations (DGMO),> pointing out how five Army personnel (four officers> and a JCO) have been singled out for "harassment,> ignominy, humiliation, agony and financial strain"> over an operation conducted jointly by the Army and> J&K Police.> > Brig Saxena has said that the operation was ordered by> a senior Army officer (Sector Commander) of the> Rashtriya Rifles on the basis of information provided> by the SSP of Anantnag.> > Brig Saxena's wife, Sushma Saxena, has also written to> the Army chief's wife Anupama Singh who's the> president of the Army Wives Welfare Association> (AWWA).> > Saying she was expressing the views of wives of all> five officers who have been indicted by the CBI,> Sushma Saxena wrote: "If our husbands are prosecuted> in this case, then every husband who is fighting in> the Valley in the future is also liable to face such> action... all our husbands have done is obey orders> and carry out operations based on information provided> by a Senior Commander and the police."> > The circumstances of the Pathribal encounter have now> been outlined by the indicted officers for the Army> top brass. The DGMO is understood to have been told> that:> > • The Pathribal encounter took place in an area> notified as a Disturbed Area under the Armed Forces> Special Powers Act, 1990 and that protection should be> provided to the five officers named as "accused" by> the CBI.> > • That two of the five persons killed in the operation> were on the list of active overground workers> maintained by the Rashtriya Rifles and that the CBI> probe revealed that a third among the dead also had> terrorist links.> > • That during the relevant period (command of Brig> Saxena), the 7 RR unit received over 50 awards,> including a dozen Sena medals. In two years, the unit> eliminated 78 militants.> > • That the CBI chargesheet had serious operational> ramifications for future Kashmir operations since it> would create distrust in the rank and file about> verbal orders and posed a threat to the lone Kashmiri> accused whose intelligence inputs had led to the> elimination of 40 terrorists.> > Though the CBI's legal panel rules that the agency> does not require sanction for prosecuting Army> officers because killing of innocent persons in a fake> encounter cannot be taken as discharge of "official> duty", the Army is gearing to challenge that view in> the Srinagar court.> > The Army's counter is that the Pathribal encounter was> a joint Police-Army operation, carried out on> intelligence provided by the J&K police and that trial> would jeopardise further joint counter-insurgency> operations.