Misdirected war against criminals in UP: Police must uphold and not undermine rule of law -Sankar Sen

-The Times of India

Backed by chief minister Yogi Adityanath, the Uttar Pradesh police has launched a vigorous crackdown on criminals. Some criminals have been killed in encounters and many, out of fear of being gunned down, have surrendered. According to data sourced from police headquarters as many as 1,142 encounters were recorded between March 2017 and January this year, and 38 alleged criminals were killed.

Encounter specialists in the police are calling the shots. Encounters took place in Lucknow, Saharanpur, Gorakhpur, Bagpat and other areas of the state. Though the CM has given a green signal and assured support to the police, these developments are worrying and should not make one oblivious of the hard fact that police encounters have many adverse consequences.

It is true that there is tacit public approval of police encounters. Criminal justice moves at a snail’s pace. Trials drag on interminably. Notorious criminals get away scot-free and cock a snook at the justice system. Encounters are not so much the problem as symptoms of the collapsing system of justice and public demand for quick solutions to law and order problems.

For proper and efficient functioning of police, illegal encounters have to be firmly discouraged by police leaders and professionals. They generate lawlessness within the police and breed contempt for law. To break law in the name of law enforcement has no place in a democratic society governed by the rule of law. It is objectionable because it is arbitrary as a process, and random in its effects. The real answer is to strengthen law and the legal process.

The National Human Rights Commission, on receiving complaints of false police encounters from Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee (APCLC) regarding false encounters staged by Andhra police, held public hearings in Hyderabad and recorded evidence. The Commission felt that the right of private defence should not be manipulated to justify fake encounters, and the procedures of Section 46(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code should not be subverted to such an end.

Please click here to read more.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *