Vikas Dubey is the latest in a series of extra-judicial killings that have plagued UP for some time now. His ‘death’ is marred by controversy and multiple sources allege a fake encounter carried out to silence the gangster who had been charged in more than 61 cases. It is suspicious, for Dubey had meekly surrendered in a Ujjain temple to avoid the same fate he ultimately met, then why would he try to escape? The script seems so outlandish that even locals have raised doubts over the happenings. This killing was starkly reminiscent of the police encounter of the four Hyderabad gang-rape accused who apparently tried to ‘flee’ in a similar manner.
The encounter of criminals is not a novel thing in India; in fact, it is much more commonplace than capital punishment. So, more people are killed by the police without trial than criminals sentenced to the gallows through the proper procedure by our courts. If they are a violation of the due process of justice, how come they are still such widespread phenomena?
Why Extra-Judicial Killings Continue Unabated?
It is now a well-known fact that Indians have lost faith in the judicial system. Rampant with red-tapism, corruption, procedural delays and empty posts, the mammoth of a system takes years to fulfill its promises. As the Hindi film, Damini has immortalized: “Tareekh pe tareekh milti hai My Lord, insaaf nahi milta!” This is a sad reality for the majority of people who spend half of their lives trapped in the slow-paced monotony of courts for trivial cases. Over three crore cases are pending in the courts of the country, nearly 15% of them for more than 10 years! As a result, many extra-judicial forms of punishment are seen to bring timely ‘justice’ in places where the courts have been exhausted. For instance, it took nearly 7 years for Nirbhaya rapists to face their ultimate punishment, while the Telangana police disposed off the 2019 rape accused within a few days and were hailed as heroes. This is a bleak picture of our hollow system, which has come to prefer encounters over trials.
Apart from the inadequacy of the judicial system, public perceptions of justice are also responsible for these methods adopted by the police. Justice in India has retained its barbaric, orthodox roots that embrace a tit-for-tat approach tainted with violence. Public lynching of an accused is given moral backing and it is seen as the policemen’s duty to teach the defiant criminals a lesson. So of course encounters of criminals are met with applause and immortalized into Bollywood ‘masala’ scripts. The film industry, with its penchant for the heroic cop protagonist who takes matters in his own hands to rid the society of all evil, has enhanced public acceptance and appreciation of cops turning executioners. Even the police deem it easier to kill a suspect than go through the trouble of building a case and proving the accused’s guilt.
We as citizens view justice in absolute terms. But in reality, the matters of law are much more complex than the black and white camps of fair and unfair. There is a vast grey area that encompasses the latent aspects of truth, penal action, and reform. To simplify it through killing criminals is an insult to the very nature of justice and rule of law. The difference between the roles of Police and the Courts blurs in our mind to give way to a twisted system where the cops play judge, jury and executioner, when all their jobs permit is capturing criminals and bringing them before the law. Even those who do not support the law enforcement’s use of such means willingly turn a blind eye fearing retaliatory action. Unlike the US, a civil movement against the high-handedness of the cops is rendered almost impossible as the police are viewed as the ultimate dispenser of justice.
The Price to Pay
You cannot play with fire without getting burnt; you cannot embrace or allow one form of police brutality (re encounters) without offsetting a spiral of police-administered justice that violates our rights. The custodial torture and deaths of Jayaraj and Fenix are a product of this very system that is used to getting away with killings. It is this very lack of accountability that has put the sanctity of our democracy in peril, for absolute power corrupts absolutely. With few exceptions, most encounters today are jaded with shady details and fake charges. As was seen in Punjab during the heights of militancy, police killed anyone whom they suspected in the slightest to have a connection with insurgents. The same was practised in the case of Naxalites. So many lives were lost with no proof of their guilt presented for perusal.
A democracy guarantees certain rights to its citizens, even to convicts. Free and fair trial is a necessity not only of the accused but also the state in order to ascertain without a doubt that the allegations levelled are true. And even if found guilty, the quantum of punishment should be in proportion to the crime committed. This is the job of courts, not the police. Subverting due democratic process even for handing out punishment threatens the very foundations of our state. The means, after all, do not justify the end, and all logic contrary to this is a sign of approaching totalitarianism. India chose to be a democratic nation for a reason; hence the policing measures should reflect the same commitment instead of behaving in a manner reminiscent of our coloniser’s policies. And the police connivance with the underbelly of crime and politics forms an inescapable nexus which has reduced encounters to a political tool readily used, than a last resort method.
This trigger-happy attitude not only severely deprives the accused a chance to prove their innocence or receive punishment in accordance with their crime; it also dehumanizes them in our eyes. All criminals are not hard-core evil. They are born from us, sometimes because of us…Without due process, the truth about their circumstances and motives will never see the light of the day. If we deprive even the most heinous ones of their rights, we fail as a democracy. Equality before the law is a fundamental right, therefore a terrorist and a petty criminal both have the right to defend themselves in front of unbiased judges through due procedure laid down by the law. Our sense of justice is hence very punitive. We as a people do not believe in reform despite claiming the opposite and are content to see criminals incarcerated for life, or worse, dead. What is the point of locking up the bad guys if they do not become better? Do we want to kill all evil or dive to its roots and weed it out? That is for us to decide.
Reform the Norms
The law is reason without passion
Aristotle
This is one statement that has stood the test of time. There is no doubt that there are numerous criminals with blood on their hands that deserve to be punished, but their fate is for the law to decide. One organ of the law enforcement taking the entire law into their hands is not only a mockery of the system but also defeats the very purpose that due legal processes were created for. The law should punish and reform the accused and simultaneously grant a reprieve to the victim. We cannot imagine the pain of someone whose rights have been violated, and it would be unfair to tell them to wait until justice is served because no amount of judicial action can reverse their suffering. But justice is never served through wanton murders without trials. To deprive the accused of their chance to defend themselves, to kill whom you deem guilty, spells another violation of the law. And if the law-protectors break it brazenly, what is to stop the common man from doing so?
All the delays, extensive paperwork, ever-shifting dates that have made the judicial system so tedious and unattractive call for reform, not a subversion of the law. And not just the system, there is a strong need to change the public attitude and perception of justice, and replace it with a more reform-centric approach instead of plain retribution. For us to question the authorities that undermine the constitution is the first step towards a stronger, more accountable nation.
%20JUSTICE){kind=link}