been subjected to physical violence including rape. There was also a case of a man being killed and his head severed from the body, put into a basket and the widow compelled to go round the village with that headload. Normat'life and social order had been destrbyedldisturbed by such activities and extra legal operations of Naxallite groups is not disputable. The State Government brought in a legislation empowering it to declare an associa6on to be or to have become unlawful and in exercise of power under Section 3 of this legislation (Andhra Pradesh Public Security Act, 1992), PWG hadabeen declared to be an unlawful association for a specific period. There was a short gap when the ban was not in operation but the ban has now become operative. a 4. Since the law and order situation was disturbed by PWG activities, the police started adopting initially stiff and gradually stiffer measures to contain their illegal operations. As PWG people started moving in groups for carrying out their activities, the police also formed groups for counter attack and keeping the illegal activities, under c h e k and control. This led to frequent encounters in which there used to be loss of life and injuries to persons on both sides. Government re-enforced the police force and provided matching sophisticated weapons to them when it was found that some of the members of th6 PWG were using sophisticated arms and ammunition. PWG groups soon established access for getting land mines and started setting them on several rural roads which killed police parties and destroyed their vehicles. The relationship between the PWG and the police force, therefore, blcame bitter and totally inimical. APCLC is a Non-GoUernmental Organisation operating within the state of Andhra 5. ,Pradesh with headquarters at Hyderabad and is affiliated to PUCL at the national level. It filed a complaint,before the Commission on 30th March, 1993 giving particulars of 285 police encounters which it described as fake ones organised by the. police to eliminate members of the Peoples War Group or their supporters and sympalhisers instead of subjecting them to the due process of law for punishing the guilty. The complaint was scrutinised in the Registry and it transpired that several of the incidents had happened prior to one year before the making of the complaint and therefore, were beyond the df the Commission onaccount of the special limitation of one year provided #under Section 36(2) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. The complainant, therefore, agreed to confine its complaint to cases within the period of limitation. Ultimately it wanted the Commission to examine the question of fake police encounter in six cases of its choice and gave a list of them being: I. 234 ( 1 ) / 9 3 - 9 4 / ~ R (case ~ ~ of Kayita Yakaiah)