During the period under review, the Working Group transmitted 50 newly reported cases of disappearance to the Government of India, of which 21 were reported to have occurred in 1992. Twenty cases were transmitted by cable under the urgent action procedure. By letter dated 19 June 1992 the Government was informed that one case had been clarified on the basis of information provided by the source.

Disappearances were reported to occur primarily, though not exclusively, in the Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, and Assam States because of the increased use of paramilitary and security forces in those areas to control disturbances arising from religious and political (separatist) tensions. The disappearances were alleged to be the result of a number of factors related to the wide powers granted to the security forces under ongoing emergency legislation. The Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act was now applicable in all states and had been invoked during the reporting period in 16 of 25 states. In designated areas, under TADA, incommunicado detention was permissible.

Several cases of prolonged incommunicado detention were reported from Jammu and Kashmir. Many detainees claimed to have been tortured during the period of unacknowledged detention. Relatives reported having been threatened for trying to locate a missing person, or detained and physically mistreated when held in lieu of the person security forces wished to question or detain. Women were reportedly particularly vulnerable to this practice and were subjected to systematic rape. In some cases, relatives reported being forced to pay for a person’s release.

By note verbale dated 8 January 1992, the Government of India informed the Working Group of certain safeguards provided by the Constitution of India with regard to the fundamental right to life and personal liberty of all its citizens. With particular reference to the general allegations for the year 1991, the Government stated that its fundamental responsibility was to maintain law and order, but that, in doing so, law enforcement officials acted in accordance with the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials. The Government also stated that allegations of human rights violations made against members of security forces were mostly found to be inaccurate, highly exaggerated, or deliberately false, but when allegations had been borne out, disciplinary action had been taken against those responsible.