women Martyrs


The following are few pictures of women Martyrs

The Role of women and their contribution,sacrifice are very high for saving the oppressed people of India. we the Indians appreciate their participation,dedication and sacrifice.

we remember their courage and sacrifice forever, our heartfelt homage to all women martyrs .

image

peace is matter of people::precious mineral is concern of Government

The law locks up the hapless felon
who steals the goose from off the common,
but lets the greater felon loose
who steals the common from the goose.
—Anonymous, England, 1821

In the early morning hours of July 2, 2010, in the remote forests of Adilabad, the Andhra Pradesh ,India, state police fired a bullet into the chest of a man called Cherukuri Rajkumar, known to his comrades as Azad. Azad was a member of the politburo of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist) and had been nominated by his party as it’s chief negotiator for the proposed peace talks with the Government of India. Why did the police fire at point-blank range and leave those tell-tale burn marks, when they could so easily have covered their tracks? Was it a mistake or was it a message?

They killed a second person that morning—Hemchandra Pandey, a young journalist who was travelling with Azad when he was apprehended. Why did they kill him? Was it to make sure no eyewitness remained alive to tell the tale? Or was it just whimsy?

In the course of a war, if, in the preliminary stages of a peace negotiation, one side executes the peace envoy of the other side, it’s reasonable to assume that the side that did the killing does not want peace. It looks very much as though Azad was killed because someone decided that the stakes were too high to allow him to remain alive. That decision could turn out to be a serious error of judgement. Not just because of who he was, but because of the political climate in India today.

oie_jpg(13)

During a recent hearing, justice Aftab Alam of the Supreme Court ,India (The apex body of Indian justice), tellingly observed that “ our Republic cannot bear the stain of killing its own children”.
Can Indian democracy be saved from such killings of its own children???
Every day many people are being killed by Government Forces.

oie_jpg(14)


Once upon a time, long years ago, there lived a king named Tantalus in Greece. Everyone in his kingdom, including his wife and son, thought he was the most wonderful man in the world. Everyone believed he was a very good king, concerned about his people and their needs. After some years, people realized the truth and wants to make deal with the king to mitigate the persecutions they are going through , after several rounds of meetings , the king agreed a deal. If he would not attack the people for 5 years, every year the people would send 10 boys and 10 girls to the king’s fort to be eaten by the awful monster that King kept as a pet, the dreaded Minotaur. After lasting all the children of kingdom, the people wants to make a revised deal with the king and send their representatives to the king’s fort, but the monster, the pet of king, eaten the people’s representatives and slept calm ,the people are eagerly waiting for the message from their messengers,but king and his pet monster sleeping well in the fort.
Even after several years, the poor people of India waiting for the message from their messenger.
oie_jpg(15)

But Swami Agnivesh(social worker) who had been asked by Union Home minister P. chidambaram to initiate talks with the Maoists in search for peace, is a perplexed man. “ if they(Government) kill the very man who was carrying my message to the Maoist leadership in Dandakaranya to begin talks and offer a substantive gesture to show their sincerity, then who do we talk with? Are we keen to end this conflict or are we getting ready for a perpetual war in the heartland of India?

Obviously, Government of India have not by any means needs peace with it’s people, since it has many obligations ,such as , hundrends of billion dollars of Arm deals ,creating lakhs of posts to paramilitary forces, police forces under the guise of employment generation to the Indian youth to curb voice of people and more than 100 trillion dollars of corporate deals with various multinational companies across the world under the guise of development of India . Truely, Government(comprising politicians, beaurocrats,police and intelligence bodies) has it’s own obligations to discharge as said above ,to feed small group by crushing majority people(truely ,india is bigest democracy in the world, where the commom people being killed,or arrested{under various laws} if question the Government).

But on every indian independence Day(15th ,August,every year), The Prime Minister and President of India will , surely, speak about poor people of india, and about well designed development programmes for them, which can be executed by paramilitary forces at Gun point,since poorest of the poor indian people(who holds world’s richest minerals) are “gravest internal threat to Indian Government”. unfornately, the Government of India,politicican, bereaucracts and Government servants are being paid by the poorest of poor people of india through the various taxes.

The peace is need of people but not of the Government, so that it will kill all peace messengers of Indian people. Lets read one of such messenger who came from a party ( as stated by the prime minister of India, the party and it’s sympathizers are “gravest internal security threat”of India ) ,from such a “gravest internal security threat” party’s messenger could not fired even a single bullet in retaliation but fallen by the bullets of Government Guns,though he accompanied with 20 members of his party(as stated by Government,in the first information report{FIR} of wanked police station,adilabad district,Telangana state,india, sadly, still , the Government killers are being paid by the sweat and blood of the indian poor people through various taxes) ridiculous,but it is truth, . Lets read the real story patiently , to know the reality and future of India ( the bigest democracy of world)

fortunately one of the best social scientist of the world, said, in the 20th century “ in future,the freedom of the people will lies in the guns of Rulers”. But it will be true even in 22nd century, if the people keep silence to the violence of Rulers.

But keep in mind, unfortunately,except very few, most of the print media, and TV channels, who can reach unto the unreached person of this world won’t like to speak truth( since many of them are in the hands of Rulers,)

ALL THE PEOPLE OF THE WORLD SHALL UNITED AGAINST INDIAN RULER’S VOILENCE IN THIS CRISIS OF HUMANITY

NOTE:
WE THE PEOPLE OF INDIA (the second largest population of the world) SINCERELY APPEALING TO ALL HUMANTARIAN ASSOCIATIONS,WORKERS,TECHNOLOGIST, JOURNALISTS,GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,SCIENTISTS,STUDENTS ,TEACHERS ,TRADERS ,BUSINESS PEOPLE SOCIETIES AND PROFESSIONAL EXPERTS OF THE WORLD , PROTEST THE ATROCITIES OF INDIAN GOVERNMENT ON ITS OWN PEOPLE,AND SUPPORT THE PEOPLES’S FREEDOM STRUGGLE.
***IN 1994 YEAR ALONE,THRICE THE GOVT.OF INDIA DECLINED TO VISIT THE UN HUMAN RIGHTS BODIES.

Mediator’s (swami agnivesh)voice

oie_jpg(12)

“Centre not sincere about peace talks with Maoists: Swami Agnivesh”

KOCHI: Social activist Swami Agnivesh on Sunday accused the Centre of not being sincere about its proposed peace negotiations as it had not ordered a judicial probe into the death of CPI (Maoist) spokesperson Azad.

“The government is using me as a pawn to deal with Maoists”, Agnivesh, who is a mediator in brokering talks between Maoists and the government, told reporters here on sidelines of the World Religious Congress here.

He said he met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on July 20 seeking a judicial probe into the killing of Azad, but nothing had happened so far.

“”Azad’s killing a setback to peace talks: Swami Agnivesh””

NEW DELHI: Swami Agnivesh, who is the peace negotiator between the government and Maoists, has said that the killing of the ultra-Left leader Cherukuri Rajkumar alias Azad is a setback to the peace process. Agnivesh claimed that Azad’s response to his initiative for peace talks was positive.

“His killing is a very big shock, the greatest shock of my life. I had written a letter to him, appreciating his steps for peace talks and also the steps I wanted him to take. Perhaps, this letter could have made him feel that the government is softening its stand. As a result, he might have been a bit relaxed on his security front. (He) might have laid down his guard that led to his killing,” Agnivesh told reporters on his arrival in Kolkata on Wednesday.

Earlier, the government had responded positively to the Maoists’ demand for ceasefire, he said. “Azad said he wanted the mutual ceasefire to be signed by both sides. Home minister P Chidambaram was also open to the idea. But, he was asking for a date for the ceasefire since he insisted that in order to implement it he had to make certain preparations. For instance, it requires 72 hours to facilitate the ceasefire,” said Agnivesh.

“”Azad was working towards ceasefire, say Maoists (Raipur, July,2010)””

In May this year, social worker Swami Agnivesh served as the medium for an unlikely exchange of letters between Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram and CPI (Maoist) spokesperson Azad regarding the possibility of a ceasefire.
The letters, now available online, suggest that Azad’s death came at a time when the Central government and the CPI (Maoist) were contemplating the broad contours of a possible ceasefire.
In his letter dated May 11, 2010, Mr. Chidambaram asked that the CPI (Maoist) “say that they will not indulge in any violent activity beginning a specific date, say, June 1, 2010.” In return, the Home Minister promised that the Central government would come up with a response that included an invitation for talks. To quote from the letter, the government “would closely observe whether the CPI-Maoist will maintain the position of ‘no violence’ for 72 hours … during the said period … the security forces will not conduct any operation against the CPI-Maoist” after which talks would begin.
On May 31, 2010, the Maoists replied at length. In a letter signed by Azad, the CPI (Maoist) indicated its willingness to consider talks if there was “ceasefire or cessation of hostilities by both sides simultaneously instead of asking one side to abjure violence.” Azad also asked the government to “initiate measures to release party leaders as a prelude to the release of political prisoners and … stop all its efforts to escalate the war, including the measure of calling back all the paramilitary forces deployed in the war zones.”
In an indication of the advanced nature of the process, on June 18 Swami Agnivesh sent out an email inviting the media to a press conference “to announce the peace process that has been initiated by me between the Government of India and the CPI (Maoist).” However, the press conference was called off at the last minute without any explanation.
“Swami Agnivesh was going to unveil a concrete proposal and a firm date regarding a possible ceasefire,” said Gudsa Usendi, spokesperson for the Dandakaranya Special Zonal Committee of the CPI (Maoist). “But the press conference was called off under pressure from the government.”
Asked for their response to this charge, North Block sources denied applying any such pressure.
They also played down the importance of Swami Agnivesh’s aborted press conference and dismissed a possible link between the proposed ceasefire and Azad’s death. “Why would the Government of India want to scuttle someone’s initiative for peace,” asked a senior official. “It is to be encouraged.”
The Hindu was unable to contact Swami Agnivesh for his comments on the ceasefire.
On July 2, Azad was shot in an encounter in Adilabad, leaving the possibility of a ceasefire in tatters. “For us [CPI-Maoist], comrade Azad was the central figure involved in the possibility of a peace

search for Justice

oie_jpg(11)

Padma had recorded the sworn statement in pursuance of filing of a murder case against the policemen who had participated in the encounter, which also saw the killing of journalist Hemchandra Pandey.

K. Padma, wife of slain Maoist Cherukuri Rajkumar alias Azad, on Wednesday named former Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram and four top police officers from Andhra Pradesh as conspirators in the alleged fake encounter killing of the extremist leader on July 2, 2010 in Adilabad district.

In her statement recorded before Adilabad Judicial First Class Magistrate Mary Danamma, the petitioner pleaded for inclusion of the names of the then AP Director General of Police R.R. Girish Kumar, then SIB DIG Shashidhar Reddy, then Adilabad Superintendent of Police P. Promod Kumar and Additional SP (Operations) S. Tripathi besides the Home Minister.

Padma had recorded the sworn statement in pursuance of filing of a murder case against the policemen who had participated in the encounter which also saw the killing of journalist Hemchandra Pandey.

The latter’s wife Babita had recorded her statement on November 29, last year.

The Magistrate subsequently posted for further evidence on February 7 for taking cognizance of the petition.

Swamy Agnivesh, who has been cited as a witness, is likely to record his statement before the Magistrate on that day.

It may be recalled that 29 policemen who had participated in the encounter in question have been accused in the first instance of killing the extremist leader in cold blood. An inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation however, found the encounter to be genuine as per its report submitted to the Supreme Court last year.

the fate of journalist who stands with peace

oie_jpg(5)oie_jpg(8)

This is the story of newly married Indian freelance Journalist Hemchandra Pandey who accompanied with the peace envoy ,hails from New Delhi,India

“UNESCO Director-General gravely concerned by death of Indian journalist Hem Chandra Pandey”
The Director-General of UNESCO, Irina Bokova, expressed her grave concern regarding the circumstances of the death of freelance journalist Hem Chandra Pandey, killed by gunfire in a clash in early July while reporting on the Maoist insurgency in the state of Andhra Pradesh.
“I am concerned about the circumstances in which Hem Chandra Pandey lost his life and I call on authorities to investigate thoroughly the conditions in which it took place,” said Ms Bokova. “I reiterate that press freedom is a fundamental human right. This implies that it can be exercised in complete safety, and the role of the police is to respect it.”
Hem Chandra Pandey, aged 30, wrote under the name Hernant Pandey and worked for several Hindi-language newspapers, according to the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ). Specialized in covering social issues, he had gone to Nagpur to interview a leader of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist), Cherukuri Rajkumar, alias Azad, who was said to be attempting to negotiate a truce with the authorities, the IFJ reports.

Hem Chandra Pandey, a freelance journalist from Delhi was killed on 2 July 2010 along with Azad, spokesperson of CPI( Maoist). He comes from Dewaltal town of Pithoragarh district of Uttarakhand.

oie_jpg(4)


His wife Babita Pandey identified him when she saw a photograph of his dead body published in Enadu(daily newspaper of Andhra pradesh,India) on 3 July 2010 and informed the press in a press conference held in Press Club Delhi on the same day.

She told the press that her husband was a freelance journalist and regularly wrote to Hindi newspapers like Nai Dunia, Rastriya Sarara, Dainik Jagaran and papers. As it was not enough for the family to run with the meagre amount of money that he earns through freelancing, he also works for a paper called Chetana on corporate communications run by a company called DARCL Logistics LTD on regular basis. He was one of the sub-editors for this magazine called Chetana at the time of his death.
She also informed all those who were present there that Hem Chandra Pandey had an MA in Economics from Kumaon University, Nainaital. He also had a Diploma in Translation from Bharatiya Vidhya Bhawan in Delhi. He also did a Diploma course in Journalism. He was pursuing his Ph D course from Almora Campus of Kumaon University.
oie_jpg(6)


“A woman remembers her best friend, a man dubbed a Maoist and killed by the Republic of India. He happened to be her journalist husband”:
BY Rahul Pandita:-
“For the first time in my life,” says Babita Pandey, “I had a wifely chat with Hemchandra pandey a night before he was to leave for Nagpur(Maharastra state,India.)” They discussed how they never took a holiday in their eight years of marriage, she says. “I told him that there were so many things that had been left unsaid in our relationship, and that we needed to plan our lives.” She remembers his putting aside the book he was reading and smiling at her. She remembers his words. “He said our life is a part of the larger events that shape this society, and that it cannot be separated from what’s happening in India or elsewhere in the world.”

Babita sits on a boulder at Jawaharlal Nehru University, and her eyes well up at the memory of Hemchandra Pandey, her husband: “My best friend,” as she calls him. It is sunny and she squints, perhaps as a ruse to hide her tears. Sometimes, she brushes imaginary dust off the dial of her Sonata wristwatch. Sometimes, she looks at her worn socks or her hang-nail fingers clutching her knees. A cup of warm tea sits by her side. It is two days since the Supreme Court issued a notice to the Centre and Andhra Pradesh government on a petition filed, among others, by Babita, seeking a judicial probe into the killings of Maoist leader Azad, 58, and journalist Hemchandra Pandey, 32. “We cannot allow the Republic killing its own children,” a court bench had observed.

The two were shot dead together last July by security forces in an alleged fake encounter. Azad had on him a letter written by Swami Agnivesh, the mediator appointed by the Centre for talks with Maoist insurgents. The police said that Hem was a Maoist as well and that both were killed in an armed engagement in Adilabad district of Andhra Pradesh, close to the Maharashtra border. Civil rights activists, however, allege that both of them were picked up from a hotel in Nagpur, flown in a helicopter to the jungles of Adilabad, and then executed in cold blood.
oie_jpg(7)oie_png

Azad was supposed to travel to Bastar from Nagpur to seek the opinion of a section of the Maoist leadership on talks with the Centre. The post-mortem reports of both Azad and Hem suggest that they were shot from very close range, even as an independent probe carried out by human rights groups tears apart the police version of events in Adilabad’s jungles. Activists allege that Hem was killed alongside Azad because the police did not want an eyewitness to survive. An agitated Swami Agnivesh, who has complained about what he terms the “Government’s deceit” (in luring Azad into a talks trap), had been demanding a judicial probe into the ‘encounter’.

Babita remembers the day very well-the day Hem left for Nagpur. It was 30 June, and Hem left for his office to check the last page of the Hindi magazine he used to help bring out. He returned in the afternoon, Babita says, and left soon after to catch his train to Nagpur. “I called him in the evening,” recalls Babita, “he picked up his phone and laughed gently. He said there was a fat man sitting on his seat. He said, ‘I’ll sit in a corner.’ I said, ‘No, you ask him to vacate that seat-after all, it’s reserved for you.'” That night, Babita didn’t call again, to her everlasting regret. The next morning, when she called, Hem’s mobile was not reachable. She tried again later in the day. This time, she found the phone switched off.

“I got really worried since Hem would make sure that he calls me from wherever he was,” Babita says. On 2 July, Hem was to return on a train that would have arrived in Delhi at 7.30 am. Babita cooked him a breakfast. He should have been home by nine. When he didn’t arrive, Babita went to the railway station to check whether the train was delayed. It was not. By late morning, news of Maoist leader Azad having been shot dead in an encounter was breaking across TV news channels. It was not all that was to break that day.

A friend of Babita caught a picture of Hem’s body in a newspaper, and alerted her brother to it. The horror took several staggering moments to sink in-he too had been shot. “He was wearing the same shirt I had taken out for him,” says Babita, “a cotton shirt, since I knew it gets very hot in Nagpur.” The shock began turning to numb acknowledgement only once she saw Pandey’s decomposed body. It was a sight all too painful, worsened by the labels some sections of the media started slapping him with. “He was just a left-leaning journalist who would spend most of his meagre income on books,” she says.
Both Hem and Babita are from Pithoragarh district in Uttarakhand that shares its boundary with Tibet and Nepal. In his college days in the late 1990s, Hem was an active member of the students wing of a left-wing party. Babita was still in school when they met. “He would come home with my brother. I liked his serious demeanour. He spoke very little and introduced me to the world of books,” says Babita. She remembers Hem lending her Premchand masterpieces like Godaan and Gaban and also Gorky’s Mother. “I was very young and understood very little, but I read them all,” says Babita. It was in 2002 that they got married-in July.

Even after marriage, Hem would prod his wife to read and write on women’s issues. “He often said that self-independence was the first step towards women’s liberation,” Babita says. The two moved to Almora, where Babita worked for a newspaper while Hem immersed himself in people’s movements such as peasant agitations and calls for prohibition.

Babita says her friends or relatives never understood their marriage. “They would say, ‘You people never go out, say, to watch a film or dine at a restaurant.’ Some of them thought we had hit a rough patch. But I always had the best possible time with him, though his lack of interest in domestic issues would sometimes bother me.”

The Pandeys moved to Delhi in 2006. Hem began working as a freelance journalist, and, according to Babita, wrote more than a hundred articles for various newspapers, mostly on agricultural issues. He was a true leftist, she says. “In my absence, he would clean the house, wash utensils and even cook food. He would not let me make tea in the morning, asking me instead to go through newspapers and tell him about reported events.”

All that is now long gone. After his death, Babita has been trying to get back to a regular life. “This is what Hem would have wanted,” she says. But it has been tough. A police party even raided their house in her absence and claimed to have found ‘incriminating evidence’ of Hem’s Maoist links. What they’d found was a stack of books no more subversive than the works of Lenin and Engels, she says, and some Maoist press releases. “There were no binoculars, or for that matter any fax machine there, as the police claimed. Only one computer was there that Hem would use to write. Books, yes, but is that a crime?” If the cops were suspicious, Babita wonders why Hem could not have been arrested instead of shot. “Even if he was a Maoist, the police had no right to kill him. You know, he had sympathies for the lower strata of the police force as well, and he would say that they were just trying to earn a living.”

After Hemchandra pandey’s name surfaced along with Azad’s, many friends advised Babita not to speak of Azad, since that would associate the name too closely with her husband’s. “But I cannot do that,” she says, “Azad and Hemchandra Pandey’s names are linked in the same chain now. Moreover, Azad’s death is equally tragic.”

Babita pauses every now and then, as if to give her best friend’s memories some space. He was young, she says, too young to have died like this. Thoughts ebb and flow in her mind-perhaps Hem would still be alive had she called the night he left. Or if she had accompanied him, as she had wanted (a plan spiked by lack of money). She misses the tea he’d make. She misses the articles he’d read aloud, and explain word by word. Like Arundhati Roy’s account of her visit to Maoist territory.

After Hemchandra pandey’s death, Babita has not returned to her East Delhi residence. But she plans to go there one of these days. She hopes the police have left untouched a pair of shoes she had bought for Hem from Delhi’s Karol Bagh market just days before he died. Or his shirts, the few he had. Or his books, the many. “I just want to keep them with me,” she whispers.

After the interview, as we walk towards the university gate, Babita has a question for me: “You own a house?” Then, another: “How much do you earn?” And then she suddenly goes silent. Perhaps she’s saying to herself what she couldn’t say to Hem in eight years of married life. Saying what was left unsaid.

Truth told by a Hole

oie_jpg(9)oie_jpg(3)

Dead men tell no tales. But when the deceased is cherukuri Rajkumar, the manner of death can speak volumes. The maoist leader’s post-mortem report, which outlook ( the Indian magazine) has now accessed, categorically establishes that he dies in a fake encounter. Read along wih the FIR and inquest reports, it exposes the elaborate set of lies drawn by the Andhra pradesh police to explain his death. The claimed encounter, a much-touted ‘gain’ in the UPA( government’s(Central Government ) war against India’s “gravest internal security threat”, was infact a cold-blooded execution by the state. Azad, a key player in the planned negotiations with the government, was picked up and shot with a handgun from a distance barely more than the size of an outstretched palm. The official version, that the Maoists were atop a hill and fired at the police party and Azad died when the cops retaliated from down below, just does not add up.

On January 14, a Supreme Court bench of Justices Aftab Alam and R.M. Lodha heard two petitions filed by lawyer Prashant Bhushan on the death of Maoist leader Cherukuri Azad Rajkumar in an alleged encounter killing. After hearing the petitions, the judges observed that “we can’t allow the Republic killing its own children”. Nearly seven months after the death of Azad, the apex court was expressing its concern on the mysterious circumstances that surround police encounters.

Outlook’s Sep 6, 2010, Story which showed that Azad had died of close-range wounds

In September last year, Outlook(Indian Magazine) had reported that the post-mortem report of Azad’s body pointed to the presence of “blackening” and “burnt” edges around the bullet-entry wound area, indicating that the firing had been done from very close quarters. There were also several discrepancies in the police FIR and the inquest report of the encounter. However, the Andhra Pradesh government had rubbished the allegations of a fake encounter and had ordered a magisterial inquiry into Azad’s killing.

“Their interpretation might differ…we will stand by our reports irrespective of what is recorded in them.”Dr Bhishma, Hospital Supdt

None of these facts as recorded in the post-mortem report and discrepancies would have come to light but for the Coordination of Democratic Rights Organisations (CDRO), a national coalition of human rights organisations that probed the encounter. They also procured a copy of the post-mortem reports of Azad and journalist Hemchandra Pandey, another casualty of the encounter.

Bhushan, who was part of the CDRO fact-finding mission, filed the petitions in the apex court on behalf of social activist Swami Agnivesh and Bineeta, Pandey’s widow, seeking answers from the central and state government on the alleged fake encounter. In her petition, Bineeta points out that both the post-mortems indicate that it was close-range shots that killed the two men. According to medical forensics the world over, the presence of “blackening” and “burnt” edges on the bullet’s entry-point wounds indicates a shot fired from less than 7 cm.

The post-mortem on Azad’s body was conducted on July 3, 2010, by two doctors of the Mancherial government hospital,Adilabad District,Andhra pradesh,India, ENT surgeon Dr Neelakanteswara Rao and anaesthetist Dr Chandraiah. Both are civil assistant surgeons and Dr Rao is a veteran of over a 1,000 post-mortems. Dr Chandraiah told Outlook that he had written the post-mortem report as Rao dictated it out to him. Sources close to one of the doctors say he firmly believes the blackening of the wound near the chest and the tattooing near the one on Azad’s right shoulder clearly indicate that the shots were fired from close range, probably less than three feet. Since the case is in the Supreme Court, it is likely the doctors will be called in to testify at some point.

“We will hear anyone willing to depose before us…I have the power to summon police officers as well.”G.K. Prasada Rao, AP judicial inquiry

The post-mortem of Pandey was conducted by Dr Aravind, an orthopaedician, and Dr A. Bhishma, the hospital superintendent. Dr Bhishma agreed the content in both post-mortem reports were his responsibility. “We will stand by our reports irrespective of what is recorded in them. Their interpretation might differ but we will stand by the reports per se,” he told Outlook.

Meanwhile, a fact-finding team from the Human Rights Forum, which visited the encounter site in the Sarkepally forest on July 6, 2010, says they are sure that there was no exchange of fire between the police and Azad/Pandey. The team spoke to locals and examined the encounter site. “That the police version of a nearly four-hour encounter in the dead of night in the course of which over 300 rounds were exchanged following which ‘two top Maoists’ died is an utter falsehood is proven by a perusal of the hillock where the alleged encounter took place. The hillock is about a kilometre from Kensuguda village amidst fairly thick forest,” the HRF claims in its report.

Others like legendary social activist K.G. Kannabiran, who passed away earlier this year, had also questioned the official version. Talking to Outlook a few months ago, he had said, “Fake encounters are a favourite tool of the AP police. I have been fighting them for the last 30 years but I know I am going to lose this battle. They will wilfully conduct murder and we will never be able to do anything about it.” Veekshanam editor N. Venugopal says “the people of Andhra are sick of the police version which they have been reading over and over for the last 40 years. The wording is the same, with changes only in the proper nouns.”

“How did Hyderabad know it was Azad’s body even before it was identified? …it was all a neat set-up.”Vamshi Krishna, Local reporter

The Supreme Court has now issued notices to the central and state governments, seeking replies within six weeks. The bench also observed that “we hope there will be an answer…a good and convincing answer. The government will have to answer many questions,” it said. The state government’s magisterial inquiry was done by revenue divisional officer G.K. Prasada Rao, who has held just one sitting so far, on September 6 last year.

Of course, police officials always point out that this is a “war against a group that challenges the Indian Constitution”. A senior police officer says the post-mortem findings can be “easily answered by the facts. In an encounter, the bullet can travel in any direction and a spinning one can also cause burnt edges. It doesn’t mean anything”. Another senior intelligence officer points out that dealing with the violent Maoists needs a “bullet-for-bullet strategy”. But people like Vamshi Krishna, a local reporter who broke the story, ask, “How did people in Hyderabad know it was Azad’s body even before a former colleague identified it? We were the first ones to reach the spot and we didn’t find Azad in his uniform and everything suggested a neat set-up. We have covered encounters before and Maoist leaders are never known to travel alone. So why was Azad alone?”

Dead men tell no tales. But Azad’s death has thrown up several questions. The truth, as is usual in times of conflict, is the first casualty.

Death of Peace Envoy

12123oie_jpg(1)1234jpg

Swami Agnivesh( social worker), who had been asked by Union Home minister P. chidambaram to initiate talks with the Maoists in search for peace, is a perplexed man. “ if they kill the very man who as carrying my message to the Maoist leadership in Dandakaranya to begin talks and offer a substantive gesture to show their sincerity, then who do we talk with? Are we keen to end this conflict or are we getting ready for a perpetual war in the heartland of India? When such distrubing facts emerge from the death of such a man, does not it merit a decent inquiry?”. For a nation at war with itself, the truth is the least it owes itself. The Maoist ideologue, from all credible accounts, had been drawn out for peace talks. Only instead of allowing him to speak, the government silenced him forever.

While the State police claimed the alleged encounter with Azad and a large group of Maoists took place in the limits of the Wankadi police station of Adilabad district on the night of July 1, a fact-finding team constituted by the Coordination of Democratic Rights Organisations (CDRO) poked holes in the official account. The team, consisting of notable personalities including Supreme Court senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, opined that Azad was likely shot dead from a very close range, not more than a foot, rather than from a distance as the police said. The CDRO argued that the duo was killed with the knowledge of the Union Home Ministry as Azad was preparing for peace talks between the Centre and the Maoists at the initiative of social activist Swami Agnivesh. Referring to the post mortem report of Azad, the report raised doubts on the versions given by the police and pointed out: “… the fatal bullet entry wound from the chest ‘at the left 2nd intercestal space’ had ‘darkening burnt edges’. The burnt mark at the entry wound is a clear indication of a bullet being fired from a very close range (no more than a foot). The corresponding exit wound is at the ninth and tenth inter-vertebral space and depth is nine inches.” “That means the bullet entered from the upper chest and travelled downwards. This questions the police version that Maoists were on the top of the hill and they (police) were below,” the team opined. The team, referring to the version of the police that they located the two unidentified bodies (which later turned out to be that of Azad and Pandey) only the next morning (July 2), wondered how the police were able to pinpoint the location of the Maoists in a forest of several hundred sq.km on the Andhra Pradesh-Maharashtra border. How come, despite 30 minutes of firing (11 to 11.30 p.m.), not a single policeman suffered any injury, whereas only Azad and Pandey were killed, the report asks. If there were 20 Maoists as stated in the FIR, why were they able to locate only two kit bags and two weapons. “In any escapade there would be more belongings left behind.” Similarly if the police were unaware of the identities of the two dead men till 9.30 a.m. on July 2 at the time of filing of the FIR, how did the electronic media learn by 6 a.m. on July 2 that Azad had been killed in an encounter? Several channels had also announced his death.

“So it clearly shows that the police knew who they had killed,” the team said. The team wondered why the police selected Wankadi mandal for the “encounter” as the “villagers clearly told us that in recent years there had been no Maoist activity in the region.”

Media reports at the time quoted human rights activists alleging that Azad and Pandey were picked up by the police at Nagpur on June 30 and brought to Andhra Pradesh in a helicopter and shot dead. They also mentioned that Azad was carrying a letter of Swami Agnivesh at the time of his arrest. Azad was a central committee member of the CPI (Maoist).

Preface

oie_jpg

 

Cherukuri Rajkumar (comrade Azad) was born in a middle calss family of Krishna District in Andhra pradesh,India on 18th May 1954. His father cherukuri laxmaiah choudary, an ex-service man, and mother karuna shifted to hyderabad to run a small restaurant and thus he had his primary education in Hyderbad and secondary education at Sainik school,korukonda in vizianagaram district,Andhra Pradesh. He did his graduation in chemical engineering at Regional Engineering college (REC),warangal and post graduation in “ORE DRESSING” at andhra university, visakhapatnam.

Students of REC were in the forefornt in forming Andhra pradesh Radical students union (RSU) in october 1974 and Rajkumar was part of that group. He was arrested in `1975 under emergency and spent a few months in jail. Radical students union was revived after emergency and Rajkumar became its state president in 1978. He was re-elected twice to that position.

In 1980 he chose to become whole timer and began his undergound life and there no looking back. For the next 30 years, he worked in different areas like karnataka, kerala, Maharastra,Gujarat and Dandakaranya, giving theoretical, political and organisational inputs to struggles in all these places. He guided party units and committees in all these states as well as south-western Regional Bureau. Though he was part of a collective decision-making body of the party, his personal contribution in terms of vision,expertise in several fields and a sharp insight into different developing themes helped the movement quite a lot. He was a voracious reader and a prolifc writer. Given the nature of his clandestine activity he wrote under different pseudonyms, and more often credited his wrings to collective, but one could easily identify his style in numerous writings in voice of the vanguard, people’s march, people’s truth,Maoist information bulletin, etc.,

In 2002 year, the Government of andhra pradesh, initiated for talks with the then CPI(ML) peoples war to bring about peace. It was Rajkumar who guided the efforts of peace negotiations on the part of the revolutionary party and he wrote a number of statements,he gave interview to newspapers clarifying the party’s position. In 2004, the talks moved a little forward between the representatives of CPI(maoist) and CPI(ML) janasakthi on one hand and the representatives of the government on the other. Between May 2004 and january 2005, it was again Rajkumar who guided and prepared a lot of statements and documents for the talks. Again beginning with 2007 when the Prime Minister described the Maoist movement as the biggest internal threat, Rajkumar consistently exposed the real intentions of mining mafia behind the onslaught, including Operation Green Hunt. Through various writings and interviews in several media, he elaborated the party’s positions on various issues including the peace process. A number of statements given by him, an 18-page interview along with audio sent to press in october 2009, his 12,262 word interview given to the Hindu newspaper in April 2010 and his letter of May 31,2010 in response to Home Minister P.Chidambaram’s letter of May 10,2010 to swami Agnivesh(social worker) are crusial; clear expostions of the postion of CPI(maoist).