Fake Encounters and Police Brutality: Justice or Jungle Raj?

Author : Hitesh (Chandigarh University)

Abstract
Police encounters have been a contentious topic in India, particularly in states like Telangana, Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh. Police encounters, often hailed as instruments of “instant justice,” pose a danger to the core tenets of India’s constitution, including the right to life, a fair trial, and due process. Despite the public’s sympathy for these tactics because to their frustration with the sluggish justice system, they harm the legal system and foster a culture of impunity. In this article, the legal framework, important decisions, empirical data, and ethical dilemmas surrounding police extrajudicial killings are all critically evaluated.

To the Point

∙ Alleged police encounters in India have increased dramatically, particularly in Uttar Pradesh.
∙ Vigilante justice thrives in the criminal judicial system because of its inefficiencies, corruption, and delays.

∙ Numerous recommendations have been established by the Supreme Court to avoid the misuse of authority, but compliance is still very superficial.
∙ Further undermining the rule of law is the media’s and political leaders’ exaltation of encounter killings.

Use of Legal Jargon
∙ Killings committed by law enforcement personnel without following the proper legal procedures or being subject to court review are known as extrajudicial killings.
∙ Due Process of Law: The idea that the government must uphold every legal right that a person has under the law.
∙ Summary executions are when someone is put to death without a fair trial, frequently by the government or its representatives.
∙ A magistrate’s judicial investigation into incidents like police confrontations and fatalities in custody is known as a “magistrial inquiry.”
∙ Mens Rea: A necessary component of a crime is guilty intent.
∙ First Information Reports, or FIRs, are the first stage of criminal investigations in India.
∙ A public prosecutor is a state attorney who handles criminal prosecutions.



The Proof
Statistical Data
∙ According to the Uttar Pradesh Police, there were around 9,400 encounters between March 2017 and April 2022, with 160 people killed.
∙ Between 2000 and 2022, more than 1,782 accusations of fictitious encounters were filed with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).
∙ Victims were purportedly shot in “retaliatory fire” or while “trying to escape custody” in several of these events; police records frequently repeat this story word for word.
Judicial Backlogs
∙ In 2022, the Allahabad High Court had more than 9 lakh cases waiting and just 93 judges working out of a total of 160 authorized judges.
∙ The average disposal time for criminal appeals in UP is around 35 years, per data from the National Judicial Data Grid.
Case Laws
1. The State of Maharashtra v. People’s Union for Civil Liberties (2014)
In order to investigate police encounters, the Supreme Court established sixteen legally enforceable criteria.

Crucial rules consist of:
∙ Filing a FIR right away in every death encounter.
∙  The CID or a police team from another station will conduct an independent inquiry.
∙  Mandatory inquiry by a magistrate.
∙  For every encounter death, NHRC participation is required.
2. Om Prakash v. State of Jharkhand (2012)
∙ The Court stated that “fake encounters are nothing but cold-blooded murders” and violate Article 21 of the Constitution.

3. Prakash Kadam v. Ramprasad Vishwanath Gupta (2011)
∙ The Supreme Court equated fake encounter killings to “state-sponsored terrorism” and clarified that police personnel responsible for such acts must face death penalty.
4. Telangana Vet Rape Encounter Case (2019)
∙ The Supreme Court-appointed Justice V.S. Sirpurkar Committee found that the police fabricated the story and murdered the accused in cold blood.

Legal and Ethical Framework
Article 21 of the Constitution
∙ Ensures individual liberty and the right to life. It is fundamentally unconstitutional for    the state to kill someone without a judge’s approval.
Article 22
∙ Safeguards against arbitrary arrest and detention.
Section 46(2) of CrPC
∙ Allows police to use force while arresting an accused but prohibits killing unless the person is accused of an offence punishable with death or life imprisonment and resists arrest.

Section 302 of IPC
∙ Provides punishment for murder, which can be imposed on police officers in case of proven fake encounters.
Causes Behind the Rise of Police Encounters
1. Judicial Delays
∙ Courts take years or decades to conclude trials, especially in serious criminal matters.
2. Public Pressure
∙ Citizens often demand “quick justice,” especially in heinous cases like rape and terrorism.
3. Political Patronage
∙ Many ruling parties openly back police encounters to project a “tough on crime” image.
4. Institutional Breakdown
∙ Inadequate police reforms, lack of independent oversight, and corruption lead to misuse of power.

Case Study: The state of Uttar Pradesh
Yogi Adityanath’s administration has publicly advocated a “zero tolerance” stance for criminal activity. A “shoot-to-kill” mentality has been fostered inside the police force as a result of his remarks, which have subtly condoned encounter killings.

∙ Important Events: The 2020 Vikas Dubey Encounter: murder of a well-known mobster who was apparently attempting to elude capture. The authenticity of the encounter was questioned.

∙ The UP STF killed Asad Ahmad (2023), the son of gangster-politician Atiq Ahmad. The use of deadly force in the name of law enforcement was called into question by this incident.

Role of Media and Public Perception
∙ Media trials and sensationalism often paint accused persons as guilty before trial.
∙ Bollywood films and TV shows romanticize police violence, influencing public opinion.
∙ Victims’ families rarely receive justice due to public apathy and lack of resources.
Supreme Court Guidelines: PUCL Case (2014)
Key directions from this case:
1. FIR must be registered immediately.
2. Independent investigation team must probe the encounter.
3. Post-mortem must be conducted by two doctors in presence of a magistrate.
4. Reports must be sent to the National Human Rights Commission.
5. Disciplinary and legal action must be initiated if the encounter is proven fake.
In spite of this, not all nations have followed the principles exactly.
Human Rights Watch and NHRC’s Role
∙ NHRC has often expressed concern over the rising number of encounter deaths.
∙ Human Rights Watch has documented multiple violations of international human rights law in such killings.
∙ India supports the right to a fair trial and the ban on arbitrary killings as a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Reform Suggestions
1. Strengthening Oversight
∙ Establish independent commissions in each state to oversee encounter investigations.
2. Police Reforms
∙ Implementation of the Prakash Singh Guidelines:
o Separation of investigation from law-and-order functions.
o Establishment of State Security Commissions.
o Transparent appointment and tenure of police officers.
3. Judicial Infrastructure
∙ Increase judicial appointments.
∙ Prioritize fast-tracking cases involving custodial or encounter deaths.
4. Accountability Mechanisms
∙ Mandatory suspension of officers involved in encounters pending inquiry.
∙ Prosecution under Section 302 IPC in case of misconduct.
Conclusion
Once uncommon instances, police interactions have become frighteningly commonplace in India’s criminal justice system.  Although it is reasonable for the public to be frustrated with a broken system, eschewing the legal system in favor of immediate justice is a surefire way to create lawlessness.  Respecting the rule of law is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the state as well as for defending the rights of those who are accused.  No officer ought to serve as a jury, judge, or executioner.
FAQS
Q1. Are police encounters illegal in India?
Not always. If an encounter is done in self-defense and meets legal conditions, it can be justified. However, fake encounters are illegal and amount to murder.
Q2. Can a police officer be punished for encounter killings?
Yes. If the encounter is proven fake, officers can be tried under Section 302 IPC and face life imprisonment or even the death penalty.
Q3. What should be done after an encounter killing?
FIR must be registered, independent investigation carried out, and NHRC informed. A magisterial inquiry is mandatory.
Q4. What is the role of NHRC?
NHRC monitors human rights violations and can recommend compensation, prosecution, and reforms based on its findings in encounter cases.
Q5. What reforms are urgently needed?
Police accountability, independent investigations, judicial reform, and implementation of Supreme Court and NHRC guidelines are critical.