Shopian Firing incident: Supreme Court refuses to turn case against Major Aditya into a nationwide debate on AFSPA. Sets date for final arguments

In a big setback to the Jammu and Kashmir government, which had on July 13 filed its counter-affidavit in the Supreme Court in the case against Major Aditya of 10 Garhwal Rifles over the Shopian Firing incident, the apex court has decided to not issue notice to other states in which AFSPA is active.

Deciding to hear the final arguments in the case on July 30, the top court extended protection granted to Major Aditya till then and turned down the J&K government's submission to have all the states in which the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) is active, i.e. Assam, Nagaland, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya, to be made a party in the case. 

Republic TV had earlier accessed the affidavit that had been filed, relevant sections of which stated the following:

"The petitioner proceeds on an assumption that the accused has a statutory protection by virtue of S. 7 of the AFSPA or other laws. The question of such protection does not arise at the stage of investigation of the FIR but at the stage of cognizance by competent court. Stopping the investigation is inconstant with the basic postulate of administration of justice. The alleged acts in question are not of state as understood in international law and therefore no principle of law can be pressed into service to prevent investigation of the FIR. It is settled law that there can be no act of state against the citizen of the country."

In March, the Supreme Court had directed the J&K government that no further investigation in the Shopian firing incident would take place till further hearing, observing that Major Aditya "is an Army officer and not an ordinary criminal."

The government had given Major Aditya its backing, contending that the state government can't lodge an FIR against an Army personnel under section 7 of AFSPA for the job done in discharge of their duty as prior sanction hadn't been taken from the Union of India. 

Section 7 of Jammu and Kashmir AFSPA says "No prosecution, suit or other legal proceeding shall be instituted, except with the previous sanction of the Central Government, against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers conferred by this Act".

The apex court is hearing the plea of Major Aditya's father, Lt Col Karamveer Singh, seeking to quash the FIR against his son. Lt Col Singh had said in his petition that Major Aditya was "wrongly and arbitrarily" named in the FIR as the incident relates to an Army convoy that was on bonafide military duty in an area under AFSPA.

The Shopian firing incident took place on January 27, as three civilians were killed after Army personnel fired at a stone-pelting mob of protesters in Shopian district. Over 200 protesters pelted stones at the Army convoy, following which the personnel had fired in self-defence.

Thereafter, the state police filed an FIR under sections 302 (murder) and 307 (attempt to murder) of Indian Penal Code (IPC) against Major Aditya and his unit of 10 Garhwal Rifles.

Subsequently, the Army filed a counter-FIR in response. The J&K Police had stated that Major Aditya hadn't been named as an accused in the FIR and had been named on the basis of the allegation that he had led the convoy that had opened fire in retaliation.