Lawyers Condemn Hyderabad Encounter Killings; Call For Upholding Rule Of Law

The country was barely recovering from the news of the horrendous gangrape and murder of the 26-year old veterinarian which took place in Hyderabad, when we were hit with the news of a cold-blooded encounter in the wee hours of 6th December which led to the death of the four accused of committing the heinous crime. As the details regarding the encounter slowly and steadily came to see the light of day, fissures started appearing in the fabric of society and heated debates arose with respect to whether the encounter was a symbol of vigilante justice or a symbolic murder of every value preached by our Constitution. Multiple leading lawyers have come forward to comment on their perception of whether the encounter was symptomatic of the systemic failure of our institutions. Their condemnation and criticism of the Hyderabad encounter is wrought with consternation. Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde told LiveLaw, "This appears to be an extra-judicial execution which is totally illegal. I will not even call it an encounter. An encounter presupposes an armed combat and firing in self-defence. At 3:00 A.M. in the morning, with people in police custody, trying to escape while recreating a crime scene, is not a story that will be easily believable. The police are relying on public support or extreme gullibility, more likely the former. There must be an FIR and a full criminal investigation by an independent agency, along with a judicial inquiry as well. Those who cheer and encourage such executions, may do well to recognize, that destruction of the rule of law, and descent into a police state, is not what this country is about." A conversation with Senior Advocate Rebecca John shed a light on the multiple aspects that underlined the commission of such an encounter and what it bode for the Constitutional development of our society. With the anguish palpable in her voice, John stated that in all her years of practice as a criminal lawyer she had prosecuted and defended people and many were acquitted by courts after disbelieving the case of the prosecution. But, she has never witnessed such a brazen attempt to subvert due process of law; "these men were accused, not convicted - they were on their first remand and even before basic facts were put before a court , they were shot dead." "There is anguish that the judicial system has failed . That is true to a great extent. But you need to invest in and strengthen the system to prevent systemic failure. In this case, you did not even give the system a chance. Committing such an act in public gaze is absolutely frightening. If this is the will of the people, it is a cause for grave concern." On parallels being drawn with the 2012 Nirbhaya case and how the convicted rapists were yet to be hanged, John commented: "Has there been no justice in the Nirbhaya rape case? Let's deconstruct facts. 1) 5 men stood trial - one in juvenile court, the other four in a regular sessions court .2) one committed suicide in Tihar jail. 3) The juvenile was punished as per the applicable provisions of of the Juvenile Justice Act .4) The three remaining men were convicted of rape and murder by the sessions court, the convictions were upheld in the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court . 5) They were never released on bail - not for a single day .6) They are presently on death row awaiting the fate of their mercy petition. Justice has been served . Unless you equate the final act of execution as the only component of justice. Executing a person should and must take time. There are constitutional protections that a death row convict can access He should be allowed to access them".John very astutely brought the underlying issues of caste and class that mar such incidents:"There is always a class angle. These were four poor people. What if they had been politicians? What if the situation had been reversed and it was a poor woman who had been raped by affluential men? Would the same end have met them?" On being asked about the way forward, John said: "There is a need for an intervention by the highest court. But, it cannot be limited to that. We need to teach, we need to educate, we need to counsel. There is a need for change at the roots of society." Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, always known for upholding the nuances of Constitution law, told LiveLaw, "If it was in self defence, it was perfectly justified. If it was an extrajudicial killing, then it was murder most foul, specially because the persons killed were in police custody (the word is hifazat, after all). People are celebrating it either ways. This is unfortunate. A nation that celebrates murderers will come to grief without fail. After all, we cannot replace our courts with mob justice. Reforming the system is certainly something we need to do. Let's talk about that. But, till it improves, we are not at liberty to take extrajudicial measures." Advocate Vrinda Grover in a Facebook post stated: "SAY NO TO...

Lawyers Condemn Hyderabad Encounter Killings; Call For Upholding Rule Of Law

Radhika Roy

Tags