Fact-Check: Were three Kashmiri labourers abducted by Indian occupational forces? Here’s the Truth

Some Pak-based handles took to social media platform X(formerly Twitter) and claimed that Indian occupational forces abducted three Kashmiri laborers from Qazigund and killed two of them in custody. At the same time, the third remains untraced in Jammu and Kashmir.

An account named Inside Kashmir wrote: “Enforced disappearance and Custodial killing a norm in occupied Kashmir. Indian occupational forces abducted three Kashmiri laborers from Qazigund and killed two of them in custody, while the third remains untraced in Jammu and Kashmir”

Moreover, several other accounts made this claim stating similar facts. The preview link can be seen here and here.

Fact-Check

The DFRAC team investigated this claim and found it to be unsubstantial as the Indian occupational forces did not abduct three Kashmiri labourers.

We conducted Google keyword search related to the viral claim and found some reports from multiple media outlets such as Greater Kashmir, Brighter Kashmir & Free Press Kashmir.

The reports stated that on February 13, the three youths of the Gujjar tribe had gone to attend a function of a relative and went missing before reaching their destination from Qazigund. All three, hailing from Rajouri district of Jammu division were working as laborers in Qazigund. Their relatives had lodged a missing report at the local police station.

In the aftermath, the Kulgam Police along with SDRF, and NDRF team, launched a search operation to locate the missing trio. However, the bodies of two from the missing trio have been discovered whereas the body of third one has yet to be discovered. Evidently, they were not abducted and killed by the Indian occupational forces in the custody.

Conclusion

It is clear from DFRAC’s fact-check that the viral claim alleging the abduction and killing of three Kashmiri labourers is completely misleading. In fact, the police, along with NDRF and SDRF teams, have launched a search operation after they went missing before attending the function of the relative.

Analysis: Misleading