A continued breach of HC ban on extrajudicial murder

The New Age   Aug 17, 2020

DEATH of crime suspects at the hands of the law enforcement agencies without judicial sanction continues apace in breach of a High Court order which on December 14, 2009, asked the authorities not to kill until the next hearing any more people in ‘crossfire’ or ‘encounter’, which law enforcers prefer to call death in ‘gunfight’ but appear to be extrajudicial killing. When the court passed the order in December 2009 on a ruling issued suo moto on November 17 that year, in connection with the killing of two regional leaders of the Sarbahara Party the day before, said that it had counted 11 extrajudicial death since the November ruling. At least 3,204 people are reported to have been killed in ‘crossfire’, ‘encounter’, or ‘gunfight’, as rights group Ain O Salish Kendra statistics say, between 2004 and July 2020; and of them, 2,410 incidents took place between 2004 and 2017. No ‘crossfire’ death had, however, been reported since December 2009 until January 9, 2010, when a ‘crossfire’ death was reported as the hearing on the ruling became uncertain because of a bench reshuffle two days earlier.

While extrajudicial killing — which the government appears to employ as a means to improve law and order but, in effect, tramples the rule of law and weakens the judicial process — continues to breach the High Court ban, four High Court rulings that questioned extrajudicial killing have not been disposed of until now, with two of them having been pending for 14 years. The hearing on the December 2009 ruling is one among them. The ruling that the court issued on June 29, 2009, when the present chief justice sat on the bench as a High Court judge, that questioned the legality of such killings and sought explanation on why criminal and departmental proceedings would not be brought against the people responsible for such incidents has yet to be heard. The other two rulings, which date back to 14 years — the first issued on May 25, 2006 that sought explanation on why the killing of a person, in fetters in police custody, would not be properly investigated and why the offenders would not be brought to justice and the second issued on August 6, 2006 that asked the government and the Rapid Action Battalion to explain why they would not be directed to ensure the security of people in custody — have also been pending disposal. But all the rulings need to be urgently disposed of for a step forward in stopping extrajudicial killing.

An indifference of the government to the issues is evident in its unwillingness to take steps for the disposal of the rulings which could also be construed as a tacit approval of such extrajudicial murders. While the government must comply with the High Court ban on killing without judicial sanction and other rulings on the issue, it is expected that the court would get down on the government and its agencies for a continued breach of the ban and for their non-compliance with the court rulings. The rule of law will crumble further if the issues are not resolved and extrajudicial murder is not stopped.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR