The home minister responds to the debate on the Dantewada incident in Lok Sabha
Mr. Chairman, I am grateful to the hon. Members who have appreciated the gravity of incident that took place last week. Therefore, they have participated in this debate with a great sense of responsibility. I have listened to most of the speakers carefully since the debate was also there in the other House, I had to be away for some time but I picked up the notes.
Sir, this incident was a great tragedy. My first instinctive reaction was that something horribly went wrong. Preliminary inquiries tend to confirm that first impression. However, it may not be proper for me to share any conclusions based on the preliminary inquiry. We have instituted a full-fledged inquiry by a very senior retired IPS officer with a distinguished record; he has already undertaken the inquiry; he has been requested to submit his report in two weeks. I am confident that the report will come to us by the 24th or 25th of this month and I promise to come back to this House and share the conclusions that we draw from that report.
I have prepared a statement which I read in the other House; I would not read the whole statement here, but I think, it is worthwhile to share some details. In accordance with our policy which I will elaborate in a moment, at the request of the Government of Chattisgarh, 141 companies of Central Paramilitary Forces have been deployed in that State for anti-naxal operations over a period of time. The 62nd Battalion was deployed in March this year, to replace the 55th Battalion. Earlier, the 62nd Battalion had been deployed in Bihar, and had gained experience in anti-naxal operations.
The decision to undertake what is called an ‘area-domination exercise’ was taken jointly by the IG of Chattisgarh, Mr. Longkumar, the DIG of that area, Mr. S. R. P. Kalluri, and the DIG of the CRPF, Mr. Nalin Parbath. It was a joint decision. The actual deployment was left to the SP of the District, Mr. Amresh Mishra and the Commandant of the 62nd Battalion.
According to the plan, they were to undertake this exercise over a period of three days, including two night halts, between April 4th and April 6th. It is reported that they undertook the exercise. Unfortunately the Deputy Commandant is dead; the Assistant Commandant is also dead; both accompanied the force; the Head Constable of the civil police who also accompanied the force is dead. We have seven surviving jawans; they have recovered; I sincerely hope and pray that they will survive. It is only on a thorough inquiry, de-briefing the seven surviving jawans and conducting investigations in that area, including forensic investigations, that we can establish what actually happened.
So, my sincere submission is that let us await the report of the Inquiry Committee; once the report is available, together with the post-mortem report, the de-briefing and the forensic investigation, we will draw the conclusions and we will draw the lessons that are to be learnt from this great tragedy.
Sir, it appears that they came under fire at 0550 hours on the morning of the 6th. It is sad that some media said that they were sleeping; they were not sleeping. It was unfortunately a place where they did not have the advantage of either height or cover. Most of them died as a result of the bullet injuries. Some died because of crude bombs and grenades. The initial reports that appeared in the media are not entirely accurate. There were no landmines; there were no pressure bombs. Yet, many of them fought bravely and on the admission of the naxals – they put out a statement – eight of the naxal cadres were also killed.
So it is not correct to say that these men did not fight back. It appears some mistakes were committed. They were caught by surprise. They fought back and they lost 74 plus one plus one. They were able to retaliate and kill eight people. That is why, I said that this is a grave tragedy and we deeply mourn the loss of lives. Let us not pass any judgement now until the report comes.
Anti-naxal operations are conducted in accordance with the policy that has evolved over time. Some comments have been made about the Congress Party. As far as Congress Party is concerned, our policy is very clear. In January, 2006, the AICC passed a resolution and I read: