Dehradun: Relatives of Anjel Chakma, the 24-year-old from Tripura who was fatally assaulted in Dehradun this month, have strongly contested the local police’s assertion that racial slurs played no role in the incident, labeling the conclusion premature and dismissive.
Anjel’s uncle, Momen Chakma, one of the first family members to reach the city following the attack, accused authorities of overlooking the testimony of Michael Chakma, Anjel’s brother and the sole eyewitness. “Michael is the complainant in this case and was present during the assault,” Momen told. “The attack unfolded over several minutes—expecting someone to record it amid the chaos is unrealistic. Rather than heed the account of the person who witnessed everything, officials are making public declarations before wrapping up the probe.”
In response, Dehradun Senior Superintendent of Police Ajai Singh stated that Michael’s initial complaint referenced only “casteist slurs” and made no mention of racial remarks during the family’s stay in Dehradun until December 27. “If additional details emerge now, we remain open to incorporating them into the investigation,” SSP Singh said. He emphasized that the case is ongoing, with evidence being compiled for a robust chargesheet.
Police had previously downplayed racial motives, noting that some accused hail from Manipur and Nepal, suggesting ethnic similarities reduced the likelihood of such bias. However, this explanation has drawn sharp criticism from North-East activists and civil society members, who highlight the nuances of regional ethnic dynamics.
According to the family, Anjel and Michael were targeted by a group of six men after protesting their rowdy conduct. Michael reported that the assailants hurled racial abuses—terms like “chinki,” “Chinese,” and “momo”—before escalating to violence. Michael was injured, while Anjel succumbed to his wounds.
“It’s beyond a single slur,” Momen added. “It’s about whether our experiences are taken seriously.” The grieving family insists the police’s stance ignores critical evidence from the eyewitness, underscoring broader concerns over validation of voices from the North-East.