A man from Metapal village in Bijapur district of Chhattisgarh has alleged that his son Somaru Pottam, 13, was branded a Maoist and killed by the security forces.
Kumma Pottam has claimed that the security forces “tied his son Somaru to a tree, while a group of four to five jawans interrogated him and tortured him by stabbing him with bayonets attached to their rifles.”
Mr. Kumma Pottam, who has moved the Chhattisgarh High Court (Bilaspur), claimed in his petition that he and his cousin Sannu Pottam were held by another group of security forces and taken to a spot near the interrogation site of Somaru.
According to the father, villagers were present when Somaru was “interrogated and thrashed.”
The villagers identified one of the interrogators as Sannu Punem, alias Teera Sannu, a surrendered Maoist, who now works with the police and who used to be a resident of Pusnar village in the vicinity of Metapal, the petition said.
Two identified
“The villagers have also identified two of those who stabbed Somaru as Mangal of Pusnar village and Manish of Kamkanar village, both surrendered militants who are now working with the police. The officer-in-charge of the team conducting the interrogation has been identified as one Pande, while the officer responsible for the team detaining the villagers has been identified as one Mandavi,” Mr. Kumma Pottam has alleged.
“At the end of the interrogation and in full view of the villagers present there, Teera Sannu, Mangal and Manish drew their rifles and shot Somaru from a distance of less than five feet, killing him instantly. The body was then untied from the tree, and dressed in a fresh uniform — a black pant and a black shirt. A 12–bore gun was placed next to the body and a photograph was taken,” Mr. Kumma Pottam has accused in his petition. He claimed that the villagers present on the spot were “threatened” with dire consequences if they spoke about the killing.
The High Court has ordered a re-post-mortem of Somaru’s body within three days. Mr. Kumma Pottam has demanded an “SIT enquiry monitored by the court.”
