Mehbooba Mufti, the former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir and president of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), has called for urgent reforms in the Joint Interrogation Centres (JICs) of the Jammu and Kashmir Police. This demand came after a Supreme Court ruling that ordered a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the custodial torture of a police constable, Khursheed Ahmad Chouhan. The court also mandated the arrest of police officials involved in this case and awarded Chouhan ₹50 lakh (approximately $60,000) as compensation.

Chouhan was reportedly tortured over six days while in custody, suffering severe injuries including mutilation. The Supreme Court highlighted that there was clear medical evidence supporting his claims of abuse, yet local police had initially failed to conduct an appropriate investigation. Instead, they registered a counter complaint against him to create a false narrative.

The court's decision emphasized that systemic reform is necessary to prevent such abuses from occurring again within JICs. Mufti's statements reflect growing concerns about custodial violence in Jammu and Kashmir and underline the need for accountability within law enforcement agencies in the region.

Original article

This article provides an insightful look into a specific case of custodial torture and the subsequent legal action taken by the Supreme Court. It offers actionable information by highlighting the need for urgent reforms in the Joint Interrogation Centres (JICs) of the Jammu and Kashmir Police. The article suggests that systemic changes are required to prevent similar abuses, which can be a call to action for relevant authorities and concerned citizens.

However, it does not provide a detailed plan or step-by-step guide on how to implement these reforms. While it educates readers about the case and the court's decision, it may not teach readers about the broader context of custodial violence or the historical background of such incidents. The article does not delve into the root causes or systemic issues that lead to these abuses.

In terms of personal relevance, the topic is significant for anyone concerned about human rights, especially in the context of Jammu and Kashmir. It highlights the need for accountability and raises awareness about the potential for abuse within law enforcement agencies. This can impact how people view and interact with the justice system and may influence their trust in local authorities.

The article serves a public service function by bringing attention to a serious issue and the Supreme Court's ruling. It provides an official account of the case and the court's decision, which can be valuable for the public to understand the legal process and the potential for justice in such situations. However, it does not offer any immediate tools or resources for the public to take action or seek help in similar cases.

The advice provided, which is to call for reforms, is clear and realistic. While it may not be an easy task to bring about systemic change, the article does not oversimplify the process or promise quick fixes. It acknowledges the need for a comprehensive approach to address the issue.

In terms of long-term impact, the article highlights the importance of addressing custodial violence and the potential for lasting change through legal interventions and public awareness. It may encourage readers to advocate for similar reforms in their regions or support initiatives that promote accountability in law enforcement.

Psychologically, the article may evoke strong emotions, especially empathy and a sense of outrage at the injustice suffered by the victim. It may also inspire readers to take a stand against such abuses and contribute to a more just society. However, it does not provide strategies for emotional management or coping mechanisms for those affected by similar incidents.

While the article does not contain overt clickbait or sensationalized language, it may be perceived as dramatic due to the nature of the case and the severity of the torture described. It presents a compelling narrative that could attract readers' attention, but it does not resort to exaggerated claims or repetitive sensationalism.

The described events reveal a profound breach of the moral bonds that sustain families and communities, and a failure to uphold the sacred duties of protection and care.

The torture of Khursheed Ahmad Chouhan, a police constable, at the hands of his own colleagues, is a betrayal of the most basic trust. It fractures the very foundation of community, where neighbors and kin are meant to be safe from harm, especially within the walls of justice. This abuse not only injures the victim but also wounds the collective spirit, eroding the sense of security and mutual support that families and communities rely on.

The local police's attempt to cover up the torture by registering a counter complaint is a further betrayal of trust and responsibility. It demonstrates a willingness to sacrifice the truth and justice for self-preservation, a hypocrisy that undermines the very fabric of social order. Such actions not only fail to protect the vulnerable but actively contribute to their harm, creating an environment of fear and suspicion.

The Supreme Court's ruling, while a necessary corrective measure, highlights the extent to which these moral bonds have been strained. The need for systemic reform in the Joint Interrogation Centres (JICs) is a stark reminder that the institutions meant to uphold justice and order have instead become instruments of abuse and injustice.

The impact of such behavior extends beyond the immediate victims. It weakens the social fabric, making it harder for families to trust and rely on each other, and for communities to resolve conflicts peacefully. It discourages the defense of the vulnerable, as the very institutions meant to protect them are revealed to be sources of harm.

The consequences of unchecked spread of such behavior are dire. It leads to a society where families are divided, where children grow up in an environment of fear and distrust, and where the elderly are left vulnerable and unprotected. It breeds a culture of silence and complicity, where the natural duties of kinship are neglected, and the land and its resources are exploited without care or consideration for future generations.

To restore trust and duty, those responsible for the torture and cover-up must make amends. They must offer restitution, not just in the form of financial compensation, but also through sincere apology and a commitment to change. They must demonstrate a genuine understanding of the harm caused and take steps to ensure such abuses never occur again.

The survival and continuity of the people depend on the strength of these moral bonds. Without them, the very foundations of society crumble, leaving a void that can only be filled by fear, division, and the erosion of the natural order.

The text shows a bias towards supporting the victim, Khursheed Ahmad Chouhan. It uses strong words like "tortured," "severe injuries," and "mutilation" to describe his experience, evoking empathy and outrage. This language emphasizes the gravity of the abuse he endured. By highlighting the medical evidence and the police's initial failure to investigate, the text presents a clear narrative of injustice, leaving little room for doubt or alternative perspectives.

The text evokes a range of emotions, primarily centered around anger, sadness, and a sense of injustice. These emotions are woven throughout the narrative, serving to highlight the severity of the custodial torture incident and the need for urgent reform.

The anger is palpable as the text describes the brutal torture inflicted upon Khursheed Ahmad Chouhan, a police constable, over six days. The use of words like "mutilation" and "severe injuries" paints a graphic picture, evoking a strong emotional response from the reader. This anger is further fueled by the revelation that local police initially failed to investigate the matter properly and instead registered a counter complaint, creating a false narrative. The anger here serves to condemn the actions of the police and to emphasize the urgency of the situation, demanding immediate attention and action.

Sadness is another prominent emotion, as the text details the suffering endured by Chouhan. The medical evidence supporting his claims of abuse adds a layer of authenticity to the narrative, making the reader feel the weight of his pain and the injustice he has endured. This sadness is intended to evoke empathy and compassion, encouraging the reader to connect with Chouhan's experience and understand the dire need for reform.

The text also conveys a sense of frustration and disappointment with the local police's handling of the case. The Supreme Court's ruling, which ordered a CBI probe and mandated the arrest of police officials involved, reflects a lack of trust in the local police's ability to conduct an impartial investigation. This lack of trust and the need for an external, higher authority to intervene underscores the depth of the problem and the systemic issues at play.

These emotions are skillfully employed to guide the reader's reaction. The anger and sadness create a sense of moral outrage, compelling the reader to take sides and support the call for reform. By personalizing the story through Chouhan's experience and highlighting the medical evidence, the text builds trust with the reader, making them more receptive to the message of systemic reform.

The writer's use of emotional language and persuasive techniques is evident throughout. The repetition of words like "custodial torture" and "abuse" emphasizes the severity of the issue and keeps the reader focused on the central theme. The comparison between the local police's initial response and the Supreme Court's ruling highlights the contrast between justice and injustice, further emphasizing the need for change.

Additionally, the use of phrases like "clear medical evidence" and "false narrative" adds a layer of credibility to the narrative, making the reader more likely to accept the presented facts and emotions. By presenting a clear victim and a clear perpetrator, the text simplifies the complex issue, making it more accessible and emotionally engaging for the reader.

In summary, the text skillfully employs a range of emotions to guide the reader's reaction, evoking anger, sadness, and frustration to emphasize the urgency and severity of the issue. These emotions are strategically used to build trust, evoke empathy, and ultimately persuade the reader to support the call for reform in the Joint Interrogation Centres of Jammu and Kashmir.