Questions about an ‘encounter’

Questions about an ‘encounter’

The killing of eight prisoners belonging to an outlawed group hours after their escape (बच कर भाग जाना) from the high-security Central Prison in Bhopal has set off a controversy (विवाद) that is unlikely to die down soon. The eight under trials, belonging to the Students’ Islamic Movement of India, had been charged with serious offences and were alleged to have been involved in the murder of policemen and in armed robberies. While escaping, they killed a police guard who had tried to stop them. The murder of their colleague may have goaded (उद्यत करना/प्रेरित करना/उकसाना) the police to pursue (पीछे लगे रहना/लक्ष्य रखना) the suspects and zero in on them within hours on the city’s outskirts with the help of the public. However, the dramatic events that took place subsequently are clouded in doubt as the official narrative does not quite hang together. The State government and the police have failed to provide a cogent (यक़ीनी/निश्चयात्मक) explanation for the events of the day. The circulation of footage purportedly recording some moments before and after the encounter has invited charges that the encounter was ‘fake’. Doubts have been raised whether the eight men were carrying any weapons or posed an imminent danger to the police party that closed in on them. Were they about to surrender, having run out of options, when they were killed? One police officer’s claim that they had firearms and had attacked the police contradicts another officer’s version that they had no weapons. M

The Madhya Pradesh government is understandably keen on an inquiry into the jailbreak to find out crucial details — such as who masterminded the escape, and whether there was any support from others in the prison or outside. Further, it should be investigated how CCTV cameras, watchtowers and searchlights all mysteriously failed while the under trials were scaling two high walls one after another. There can be no justification (तर्गसंगतता/औचित्य) , however, for the government’s stand that the encounter itself does not require an investigation any deeper than a routine (सामान्य / पहले जैसी होती रही) magisterial inquiry. The Supreme Court has laid down that every police encounter has to be probed (जांच की) by the Criminal Investigation Department or any other independent police team. In this context, the condemnation (निंदा/तिरस्कार) by members of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party of all those who doubt the official version is troubling. Such doubt cannot be interpreted as support for either the ideology (विचारधारा/सिद्धांतवाद) or the violence perpetrated (बढ़ावा दिया) by those who escaped from prison. Instead of expecting unquestioning acceptance from all quarters when issues of human rights and the rule of law are involved, the State government would do well to institute a thorough probe into the episode to quell (शांत करना/दमन करना) all doubts and suspicions.