Justice delayed is justice denied but the justice hurried is justice buried
On the night of the 2nd July, a team consisting of 10-12 policemen went to
arrest the deadly criminal named Vikas Dubey from his Kanpur residence[1]. He
had wanted in more than 60 criminal cases of murder robbery etc. meanwhile some
policemen gave the input of the raid as a result 8 policemen martyred in the
operation. We haven't seen such an action taken by any crime against the police
recently.
He was the prime accused in the murder of BJP leader Santosh Shukla
who had been given the rank of a minister of state inside the Shivli Police
station but 25 policemen inside the police station refused to be a witness
against him and session court acquitted him citing lack of evidence as a reason
of verdict and this incident is considered the major highlight of his crime
career. He had been involved in the extortion business. He never turned back
from 2002.
A villager named Rahul Tiwari registered an FIR of an attempt to murder against
him and police went to raid his house where his men were ready to attack
policemen. They blocked the road using JCB and they fired heavily with automatic
weapons. Police formed 25 STF teams to catch him and his home including two cars
were demolished in the Kanpur which is an exemplary action though CRPC doesn't
give any such provision. CRPC gives the police power to seize or attach any
property if they believe the same is been included in any crime. Police are
required to submit a report to a magistrate and he will adjudicate how property
is to be disposed of according to law. [2]
After a run of almost a week, Vikas Dubey was caught by the police, in Mahakal
temple of Ujjain Madhya Pradesh, an STF team was sent to bring him back in UP.
While returning his car overturned near Kanpur where he tried to escape and he
was killed in self-defense meanwhile police eliminated Prabhat Mishra Amar Dubey
and few more in encounters.
How Vikas Dubey was killed raised various uncomfortable questions against the
Modus Operandi of the police in our country. Our constitution provides the right
to life to everyone, in the landmark Judgement of
Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of
India Supreme Court held that every individual has the right to life and that
doesn't mean mere existence it should be with dignity and respect.[3]
Supreme
court in the landmark judgment of
AK Gopalan case held that due process of law
should be followed if any person is being deprived of his rights and personal
liberty it should be done while considering the provisions of Article 21 of the
Indian Constitution and same shall not be arbitrary.[4] It is presumed by many
legal luminaries that any person may have committed any heinous crime yet the
due process of law is to made available even to the worst human of the earth our
belief in human rights constitution demands that no one shall be killed by the
police in an encounter.
According to an RTI reply, NHRC registered 1,782 fake encounter cases between
2000-2017 where Uttar Pradesh alone accounts for 44.55% cases that come to
almost 750 cases. It is worth mentioning here that the next five states apart
from Uttar Pradesh are Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Assam, Jharkhand, and
Manipur. [5]NHRC recommended its government agencies to provide adequate
compensation to the families of people who died in such cases.[6]
Coming to the situation of Uttar Pradesh it is believed that the law and order
of state deteriorated in the Samajwadi party regime when Yogi Aadiynath became
chief minister of UP he explicitly warned criminals of state either their mend
their ways or get ready to die. Since 2017 119 accused killed in police
encounters in UP to which 74 encounters were given clean chit by in the
magisterial inquiry set up by the state government while even 13 policemen lost
their life lives in those encounters.[7]
NHRC issued fresh guidelines regarding the intimation of custodial death of any
accused which states incase of any encounter same has to be reported to the
Human Right commission within 24hr and the post mortem reports inquest request
and other essential documents regarding the case has to be submitted to
concerned human right watchdog for the further inquiry within the 60 days.[8]
In the year 1997, the chairperson of NHRC MN Venkatachalaiah addressed to chief
ministers of all states that in case any policemen found guilty of custodial
death he should be tried with the same laws of IPC no special defense should be
available to him he should be prosecuted as a normal person without any
discrimination.
Supreme Court in
PUCL vs the State of Maharashtra and another [9]Laid down 16
guidelines to be followed in case of any encounter inquiry. The judgment was
delivered by a 5 judges bench headed by then chief justice of India RM Lodha.
The major highlight of the judgment was set up a magisterial inquiry in all
death cases in course of police firing.[10] The guidelines by the supreme court
don't make it mandatory involvement of NHRC until and unless there is doubt of
independent investigation though information of the incident has to be sent to
the commission without any delay.
A PIL was filled by a Mumbai based lawyer in the supreme court day before the
encounter that there is the probability that Vikas Dubey might be killed in the
encounter the petition raised the serious question of extrajudicial killing by
the UP police. Till now Uttar Pradesh's government has constituted a one-member
judicial commission headed by Shashi Kant Agarwal to probe the different aspects
of the case. A three-member SIT has been also formed headed by senior IAS
officer Sanjay Bhoosreddy that will look at how Vikas Dubey came to know about
the raid and who investigate the role of policemen providing inputs to him.[11]
A similar writ petition was filed by advocate Nandita Bharti in Lucknow bench of
Allahabad high court seeking direction to form a judicial commission to
investigate the encounter of Vikas Dubey which was dismissed by the court citing
that state government has already formed a single-member commission under a
retired High court judge.[12]
The nexus between crime and politics is not new, we have seen many instances
where many notorious criminals have been directly linked with the political
parties of the country and similarly, Vikas Dubey is said to have very strong
connections with leaders of Samajwadi and Bahujan Samajwadi party of Uttar
Pradesh. Many people strongly believed if he had brought into the police custody
he could have spilled many beans of many renowned politicians but at the same
time can we afford to ignore the fact many criminals having direct links with
big fish political leaders are in jail already but we couldn't take any
significant decision against them.
Recently 2judges bench of the supreme court headed by RF Nariman ordered the
political parties to publish the criminal background of their candidates
contesting in any assembly / general elections. The parties are required to
publish the reason that made choose those with criminal records over any other
potential candidate for the polls within 48 hours of the nomination. The supreme
court gave detailed guidelines that have to be followed by the political parties
when they decide to give the ticket to someone having any criminal record.
It is
worth mentioning here that the winnability of a candidate cannot be the only
reason for the selection. The information regarding the criminal background of
any candidate has to be uploaded on the website of the party, social media
platforms like Facebook and Twitter, one local vernacular, and one national
newspaper.[13] The election commission is given the responsibility by the
supreme court to regulate this directive by the political parties.
In case of
failure of compliance of the order the president of the respective political
party would be held liable of the contempt of court.[14]
Though we already had legislation that bars any criminal from contesting any
elections in India. Any individual punished with a jail term of more than 2
years cannot contest in an election for six years after the jail term has ended
meanwhile any person facing trail can contest in any election.[15] 233 out of
539 newly elected MPs have serious criminal charges against them. This report is
prepared based on the affidavits filed by candidates themselves which means that
about 45% of the MPs have been involved in criminal cases. In the year 2009,
there were 30% of MPs with criminal records. It is crystal clear even after many
guidelines by the Supreme court we have seen an uprise in the no of MPs with
criminal records.[16]
Even in the present case of Vikas Dubey, we have seen how he used his political
connections to establish his criminal kingdom in Uttar Pradesh that's why this
is high time for our political parties and election commission to decriminalize
politics. In the Corona era when the police the department has been working very
efficiently for the general public, there is still, a police reform that is
required to regulate the working of police forces in our country. They are
required to held accountable for any ultra-vires action, they need to separate
law and order from the investigation the working and living conditions of the
police department have to be improved and we need to work on the public-police
relations.
General people need to understand Vikas Dubey and even Telangana rapists were
killed in the encounter because they tried to flee away from the police only. We
can't glorify the killing of any person without the due process of law no matter
how dreaded criminal he may be. It is against the spirit of our constitution
that advocates the right to life and free legal aid to everyone. Our criminal
justice system is based on a reformative approach which is aimed to reform any
criminal. In a civil democratic country, we cannot have a retributive criminal
justice system which says an eye for an eye is the best possible way.
It is imperative of our lawmakers to come up with certain amendments in the
previous law and some new provisions that can speed up slow tired court
proceedings in our country.
End-Notes:
- The criminal procedure code,1973, section 41
- The criminal procedure code,1973, section 103
- Maneka Gandhi V. Union of India, MANU/SC/0133/1978
- A.K. Gopalan V. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27
- Phalguni Rao, Feb 02, 2018, www.firstpost.com/india/nhrc-registered-1782-fake-encounter-cases-between-2000-2017-uttar-pradesh-alone-accounts-for44-55-4332125.html/amp
- Protection of Human Rights Act,1993, section 18
- Manish Sahu, Apurva Vishwanath, July 11, 2020, www.indianexpress.com/article/India/74probes-complete-in-up-police-get-clean-chit-in-all-6500071/lite
- www.nhrc.nic.in/press-release/nhrc-issue-fresh-guidlines-regarding-intimation-custodial-death3
- People's Union for Civil Liberties & Ors. VS. State of Maharashtra CDJ
2014 SC 831
- The criminal procedure code,1973, section 176
- Rajesh Kumar Singh, www.hindustantimes.com/india-news-up-govt-forms-judicial-commision-to-probe-kanpur-ambush-vikas-dubey-encounter/story-odRx9RjUwBHaK6Bkrkc6no_amp.html
- www.indianexpress.com/articles/cities/lucknow/vikas-dubey-encounter-allahabad-high-court-dismisses-petition-for-setting-up-of-judicial-commision-6504548/lite/
- Public interest foundation and others Vs. Union of India and another
LNIND 2018 SC
- INDIA CONST, art 129
- The Representation of People Act,1951, Sec 8
- www.adrindia.org/content/not-parliament-be-proud
Please Drop Your Comments