“To an extent that crime is the byproduct of conflicting interpretations of what is proper conduct by different segments of a population. It is in no sense due to pathologies of the individuals involved but to condition peculiar to our social and political organization. TO that extent, crime is an aspect of political behavior or find it regarded as criminal by the dominant majority”
-Criminal and Criminal administration, J.P.S Sirohi-
Subhasri Das, alias Saswati alias Seema alias Mili is not just a name of an woman to identify. For Orissa police, “like the different names, like its work”. Each time the Orissa police and its espionage system go deep behind its investigation in this case they find more astonishing facts about her under ground activities. How Subhasri is important to Orissa police is conspicuous from this incident that, soon after her arrest, the commissionerate police and special branch started dog fighting to take the credit of her arrest. And The Maoist organization’s violence intensified. Apart form this one can understand How Subhasri (now afterwards she will be known by this name) is not an oridinary culprit before law. Her gravity of offences is clear from the sections under which she has been booked. I.e., 120-B, 121-A, 122-A, 124-A, 34/63 of Indian penal code, UAPA sec-10/13//18/20. As per police allegation Subhasri had a decade relation with naxal later maoist organization. She has been working as a key coordinator between under ground banned red ultras and over ground elements. To justify all of these allegations carved by police, may have any evidence and witness but, for the time being it seems police is right at least for one thing that, Subhasri is wife of most wanted home grown maoist leader Sabyasachi Panda alias Sunil, who is behind all the major violence targeted in the state for the last six years. Police have one strong witness from the family members of Subhasri that, wedlock took place between Sabyaschi and Subhasri on 1998. From that date until January 14, 2010, police is clue about her whereabouts.
Lets give a close look what the police officers commented to the media after her arrest
January 15:- “She has been arrested under the Unlawful Activities prevention act we have also taken in to custody a person owning a printing press in Nayapalli area here and a three wheeler driver who was carrying maoist publicity materials. Police investigating and analyzing the seized materials. The seized materials included a laptop, mobile phone, and large quantity of naxal literature and publicity materials”
On this evening one of the police officer told to media, “ the twin city police commissionerate acting on certain clues intercepted an auto rickshaw in balugaon( in Khurda District) late on Thursday night….on the basis of information provided by the driver, we got hold of Subhasri and her 9 yrs old daughter from mancheswar area and the printing press owner fron the Nayapalli. The press owner was not only involved in printing , he also cooperating Subhasri”
January 16:- “ They are all the over ground workers of naxal organization for the last few years….her(Subhasri) 9 yr old daughter has been handover to the grand father Dhanurdhar das of Nayagarh…police arrested the four persons …and interrogating them at some (undisclosed) place .”
January 17:- this is the first time the commissonerate police officially declared the arrest of the Subhasri and three others in following words, “ …till arrest we did not know she was the wife of Sabyasachi Panda. Information obtained through interrogation and down loading the computers and materials seized from the possession indicate, she is a professional revolutionary working for years. She functioned as key coordinator of the Orissa state Organization Committee comprising Bansadhara, Ghumusara, Sambalpur, Sundergarh and Kalinga Maoist divisions. We have also found that she was regularly in touch with Kisenji (Koteswar Rao) and Sumitda …..police had been on the look out for the maoist couple for the past several years after they went underground in the late 90s.”
On 19th January Special Intelligency Wing (SIW) demanded that the arrest of Subhasri was executed basing only on their information. Even after a few employees they have done a wonderful work. This statement put commissionerate police in to an embrassing situation and countered the brethrens comment . but the dog fight ended soon after the case has been shifted to crime branch . This day one of the police officer of commissionerate police said that, “Subhasri used to change her address quite frequently and mostly preferred to stay in rented houses on the outskirts of the city. She had several aliases such as milli and seema but usually she introduced herself as Saswati or Sasmita. She mostly kept low profile and avoided public contact. Further he adds that she (subhasri) was an important member of the Orissa state organizing committee of the outlawed CPI(maoist) of Jharkhand, W.B and Andhra Pradesh, She would often send Kishore ku Jena cadre name “ajju” to these states on work. He is the main courier operating from Bhubaneswar at the behest of Subhasri, for which the W.B., Jharkhanda and Andhrapradesh police come to question her because of her links . The source further added , “…during the turn of the millennium Subhasri was moving around the state along side Sabyasachi, but the decession to base her in the state capital, was most likely taken 3yrs ago, to keep a tab on the media and publicity activities collect donations and ensure a normal upbringing for their daughter”
On 20th January: - “…from our investigation it has been proved that, she is an active cadre of the organization. She is the member of maoist central committee …..directly involved in Nayagarh Operation. She gave logistic support to the Maoists…..she also involved in other attacks in Gajapati, Rayagarh district…”
CPI(maoist) is banned both by state and center. So, a single evidence for link with this organization is sufficient to put any person behind the bars. But, our constitution gives high priority not to punish a person with out sufficient and well proved evidence. By analyzing all the reports and infromations gathered except police sources and personal investigation speaks some thing different and raises some serious question mark on police allegations and actions.
On 14th January night commessionerate police basing on the information of the special Branch went after an auto rickshaw (OR02 BA 5327) which was going from Bhubaneswar to Gajapati District via Ganjam, with some considerable amount of naxal publicity materials. The commissionerate police could had caught it, the rickshaw already passed Khurda but Balugaon and Banapur police caught the rickshaw near Saralasingh railway level crossing. In this act police taken the driver Sangram Bholo and Kishore Jena in to custody. Police seized 3 packets of maoist posters, some thousand rupees, a route map, some grey coloured dress and a diary. The driver Sangram was from Balaswar village under Kabi Surya Nagar P.S. of Ganjam District, while Kishore was from Radhua village under Dellanga P.S. of Puri District. After their capture a team comprising of the members of special squad, mancheswar police and Mahila thana started a searching operation. In this operation they caught 5 suspected people along with a printing press owner (tarini press) Jayakrushna champati later raided Hansapala colony, a suburban area of Bhubaneswar. On that night police lodged an FIR in Banapur police Station, and after 36 hours on 16th January evening Subhasri along with others produced before Banapur court. Police again brought her under remand for three days till 19th January for more interrogation . On 19th January the case was handed over to Crime Branch. Crime branch after producing her before court again took for another 7 days remand and reproduced on 25th January. In these days Subhasri was interrogated by Andhra police along with the other SPs of different districts of Orissa and Sanjeev Marik( I.G., special operation)
Than what is the fault of Subhasri,
She is the wife of most wanted banned CPI (maoist) leader Sabyasachi Panda alias Sunil.
She did not involve directly in the maoist operation along with her husband, and remained in Bhubaneswar for her daughters future.
She did not involve any of the so called democratic political party like her father or father in laws family.
If the above three is rejected for purely emotional ground, than review the following cases;
1) If special branch traced and tracked Subhasri for last two years and informed state police department about her before than, why not police took any step to arrest her.
2) Why commissionerate police said that they have no information about her till the arrest while the special branch had given opposite view.
3) It is mandatory that after remand and interrogation, the detailed report should be produced before court along with the accused but it did not executed for the two times( AIR 1980, page 1510)
4) Police and Crime Branch failed two times to proved her action, intention and planning collectively which is alleged under section 120-B, 121-A, 122-A, 124-A.
5) Banapur police lodged a case against her (Subhasri) case number- 8/2010 under section -120-B, 121-A, 122-A, 124-A, 34 IPC. UAPA-10/13/18/20
6) Crime Branch took the case (case number-1/2010) but left the section 120-B and UAPA-10/13, why crime branch reluctant to lodge the same section against her.
The similar cases have been interpreted by authority of law in following manner;
a) In Nandini Satpathy V. P.L DANI(AIR 1977, SC 1025) the supreme court has considerably widened the scope of clause (3) of article 20. The court has held that the prohibitive scope of article 20(3) goes back to the stage of police interrogation not commencing in court only. It extends to and protects the accused in regard to other offences pending or imminent –which may deter him/her from voluntary disclosure. The phrase compelled testimony must be read as evidence procured not merely by physical threats or violence but by psychic (mental) torture, atmosphereric pressure, environmental coercion, tiring interrogatives, proximity over bearing and intimidatory methods and the like.
b) IN Kartar Singh V. State of Punjab(1994, 35 SC 569) the supreme court held that “ a person becomes a terrorist or is guilty of terrorist activity when his /her intention, action and consequences all the three ingredients are found to exist together”
