Explained | The judgment on the Burkapal Maoist attack

What were the charges against the accused tribals? Why have they been acquitted by the NIA court?

The story so far: A National Investigating Agency (NIA) court in Dantewada on July 15 acquitted 121 tribals, including a woman, who were arrested in connection with a suspected 2017 Maoist attack that claimed the lives of 25 security personnel in Chattisgarh’s Sukma district. Barring a few, all the arrested had spent over five years in jail by the time the acquittal order came. At least 108 have been released following the court order, while the others remain jailed as they are accused in other cases. One of them died during the trial last year. Most of the acquitted tribals are from the interior villages of Sukma and Bijapur and are aged between 20 to 60.

On April 24, 2017, a combined patrolling party — comprising 72 jawans from the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF)’s 74th battalion and district police — were guarding a road cum bridge construction in Sukma’s Burkapal when they were ambushed by a large group of 200-250 alleged Maoists. The attackers fired and hurled explosives at the jawans following which 25 of the security personnel were killed and seven others injured. This was the second deadliest Naxalite attack in terms of casualties. Some of the Maoists were also killed in the crossfire when the security forces retaliated.

The investigators alleged that the arrested villagers were members of the banned CPI (Maoist) Party. According to the Union Home Ministry, CPI (Maoist) came into existence in 2004, following a merger between the People’s War Group (PWG), and the Maoist Communist Centre of India (MCCI). The prosecution also submitted that they had been in possession of weapons. In short, it was alleged that the arrested tribals had planned the conspiracy of the attack and had taken part in it armed with sophisticated firearms and improvised explosive devices and grenades. Apart from killing the security personnel, the attackers had also allegedly indulged in dacoity by taking away arms, ammunition and other equipment from the security personnel during the attack.

All 121 accused were charged with Sections 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 302 (murder), 149 (unlawful assembly), 307 (attempt to murder) 396 (dacoity), 397 (robbery, armed with deadly weapon) and 120 (B) (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. They were also charged with provisions of the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act (CSPSA), 2005 and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967, that prohibit taking membership of an unlawful organisation (CPI(Maoist) in the given case) and indulging in any unlawful activity for it. Apart from this, provisions of the Arms Act, 1959, and Explosives Act, 1908 were also slapped.

The prosecution relied on the ‘testimonies’ of the witnesses, including that of the accused. It also relied on purported seizures from the arrested men and recoveries from the spot of the crime. These included empty bullet shells, grenade shells, detonators, bows, arrows and clothes the Chhattisgarh Police claimed the alleged attackers were wearing when they ambushed the police party. Twenty-six prosecution witnesses were also examined.

Represented by nearly half a dozen lawyers, the defence denied all the charges and said that all the proceedings by the prosecution/police had been done “sitting in the police station” where the case had been registered.