CW-1996-0005Barpeta, AssamJudgment 12 June 1996

Bar Tapa Woman vs State of Assam and Others

The Gauhati High Court held that a Bar Tapa man, though an admitted hardcore ULFA member, was killed by Assam Police personnel in a cold-blooded manner at Bar Tapa on 3 June 1995 rather than in genuine cross-firing. Agreeing with the Barpeta District Judge's enquiry, the court found no bona fide attempt to apprehend him alive though ample opportunity existed, with disproportionate retaliatory fire from 3 to 5 feet. It held the police wanted to eliminate him, shattering the rule of law. The court awarded Rs 1 lakh compensation to his mother for breach of Article 21, payable within three months. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

Externally reportedV2
What this record means

This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.

How verification works →

Report card

By judgment dated 12 June 1996, the Gauhati High Court (Coram: J. N. Sarma, J.) returned findings adverse to 4 police personnel, namely: Deputy Superintendent of Police, Barpeta, Assam Police; Sub-Inspector, Barpeta, Assam Police; Sub-Inspector (in charge, Bhabanipur OP), Bhabanipur OP, Barpeta; Constable, Barpeta, Assam Police, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 1 lakh (Rs 1,00,000).

Register number
AS 15 CW 0002
Case reference
1997 CriLJ 874
Court and date
Gauhati High Court (Coram: J. N. Sarma, J.), 12 June 1996
Officer(s) at the material time
Deputy Superintendent of Police, Barpeta, Assam Police; Sub-Inspector, Barpeta, Assam Police; Sub-Inspector (in charge, Bhabanipur OP), Bhabanipur OP, Barpeta; Constable, Barpeta, Assam Police
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Not stated in the cited sources
Finding of the Court (extract)
“there was no bona fide attempt to apprehend a Bar Tapa man but he was killed by the police personnels in a cold blooded manner.” (at para 6)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 1 lakh (Rs 1,00,000).
Present status of the proceedings
No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

The Gauhati High Court judgment dated 12 June 1996 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported

Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.

Official finding: supports allegation.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“there was no bona fide attempt to apprehend a Bar Tapa man but he was killed by the police personnels in a cold blooded manner.” (para 6)

Institutional response

1
12 Jun 1996

Order issued

Concluded
Gauhati High Court External · Binding

The Gauhati High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 100,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: 1997 CriLJ 874
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))

Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.

Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.