Government is fighting terrorism but in the process, so many innocent civilians loose their lives in almost every terrorism-related incident. Despite steep decline in infiltration from across the Line of Control, the terror of terrorism still persists with strength of foreign groups like outfits like Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM). There is high possibility of hidden stores of arms and ammunition with such groups. According to the latest figures tabled by the Union Government in the ongoing session of Parliament, as many as 949 civilians and 346 security personnel have been killed in terrorism related violence during 2007 in J&K, North-Eastern states.

We have improvised on conquering terrorism to a great extent but the war is not over yet. Our aim has to be to totally exorcise our picturesque land of the evil. We have definitely come a long way but still there is more distance to cover. Security forces have to walk a tight rope in the given scenario. Very rightly their hands are restrained by laws of the land. They cannot run amuck as the militants do. It needs to be appreciated that an overwhelming majority of them have shown the self-control. The killing of innocent lives in custody is also an issue. Police and other forces have no right to arrest a person on suspicion and kill him during custody. Even criminals and detainees have rights and they cannot be deprived of human rights. It is the duty of police and the armed forces to protect their lives and get them punished only under the law. No sane person will disagree with him. These opinions are in conformity with the principles regulating a healthy civil society. Detention without trial is anathema to a sane social order. The murder in police custody is a crime of the worst type. One of such incidents took place in 1990 where Justice (retd) Kawoosa was dealing with the case of abduction and killing of a teenager. He chided the police for alleging that the murdered young person was working with a militant organization namely Al-Jihad. He noted that no evidence either documentary or oral had been given to substantiate the charge. Merely alleging that he was working with Al-Jihad outfit will not establish that the victim indulged in militancy.

Such blood shedding should be allowed or not allowed depends upon principals and ethics which may differ. They complicate the fight against wicked elements opposed to the unity and integrity of our nation. In our democratic nation, there is justified concern for human rights which is uniform for all. In fighting terrorism, where enemies both known and unknown are involved, a mixed strategy and decisive action is required. This is unlike fighting on the borders where shedding of blood is inevitable but where it can be, it is best avoided.