SHILLONG, SEPT 27: The state police on Monday reiterated that the action on August 13 was taken for the immediate arrest of the former HNLC leader (L) Cheristerfield Thangkhiew.
A statement issued by the Assistant Inspector General of Police (A) GK Iangrai on Monday said that the arrest of (L) Cheristerfield Thangkhiew was necessitated in view of incontrovertible evidence of his involvement in the IED explosion at Khliehriat Police reserve on July 14 and also credible information received between August 10th to 12th, regarding his involvement in conspiracy for conducting another IED explosion on August 13 in heavily populated areas in Shillong which, if not prevented, would have led to huge loss of life and destruction of public property.
It said the role of (L) Cheristerfield Thangkhiew had also been unearthed in the extortion demands received by MDCs and prominent businessmen, the evidence available pointed to modus operandi of (L) Cheristerfield Thangkhiew of undertaking extortion demands and using money received for financing IED explosions at the behest of HNLC under the cover of being a ‘retired’ HNLC operative.
The statement said that the police action was aimed at the swift arrest of (L) Cheristerfield Thangkhiew so as to interrogate him as to the planned location of the next IED explosion.
“In these circumstances, neither was it possible, necessary or advisable for the Police to serve a notice upon (L) Cheristerfield Thangkhiew.
In-fact it was necessary to undertake the operation for his arrest in covert manner so as to not provide any opportunity to (L) Cheristerfield Thangkhiew to destroy evidence and/or abscond,” it said.
“The decision for his arrest was taken at the highest level in consultation with all senior officers of the Department and after evaluation of all options and was considered necessary to prevent large scale loss of life in further IED explosions,” it added.
The state police further stated that terming the death of (L) Cheristerfield Thangkhiew as killing on the orders of the police is a gross misstatement and a complete falsehood.
It said that the death was caused due to non-cooperation of (L) Cheristerfield Thangkhiew with the police team and clear attempt on his part to assault and cause fatal injury to a member of the police team, and the resultant firing of single shot by police personnel, purely in self-defense.
According to the police, the successful arrest of (L) Cheristerfield Thangkhiew would have aided the effort of the Police in bringing the active cadres of the HNLC overground and therefore arrest was the sole objective of the police action dated 13.08.2021.
Fourthly, by publishing unverified allegation made by some persons, the newspapers have also attempted to bring disrepute and tarnish the reputation of the police force and in particular of officers who are not native to Meghalaya.
Finally, the above publication is also illegal and in violation of Press Council Norms of Journalistic Conduct, (2010 Edition), Guideline No. 10 of which requires Newspapers to eschew suggestive guilt and to not project or promote the case of any one party in the case of any controversy or dispute.
The manner in which leading newspapers are publishing unverified facts and conspiracy theories, promoting ill-will and animosity in the public against bonafide actions of the Police force taken to protect the lives of innocent public is an abuse of press freedom.
Such publication is malicious and tantamount to inflammatory publication against the Police force and neither constitutes fair comment nor falls within the corners of journalistic freedom.
The Police is dutybound to cause inquiry into the events of 13.08.2021 as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and has also joined the proceedings before the Hon’ble Commission constituted under the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952 and shall take all such measures as may be directed by the competent courts of law.
The above clarifications are being issued solely to bring on record the correct facts and to maintain the sanctity of pending proceedings before the competent courts of law and also before the Commission of Inquiry. The same may also be considered as exercise of ‘right of reply’ in terms of Guideline No. 14 of the Press Council of India, Norms of Journalistic Conduct, (2010 Edition).
By Our Reporter
+ There are no comments
Add yours