CHENNAI: On July 3, Jayalalitha reached home after spending an entire night and day at the Royapettah police station. A few minutes later, at around 8.45 pm, news flashed on the television screen saying her son Anandan was gunned down by the police. This was ‘instant punishment’ given to Anandan for attacking a police personnel. The police claimed Anandan had attacked a sub-inspector with a ‘knife’ and tried to escape, when an assistant commissioner shot him in ‘self-defense’.
Anandan was not a terrorist nor did he have any bombs or guns with him but he had challenged the police. He had three attempts to murder cases, a woman harassment, unlawful assembly and six hurt cases against him and was imprisoned six times. “He challenged the police and the lesson taught to the rest of the public is that, if one challenges the police, they will be shot down,” said Jayalalitha.
“I am not justifying what Anandan did. He definitely cannot attack a policeman, leaving him with 16 injury marks, but the court could even sentenced him to life imprisonment. Killing him and taking away the father of two young children and leaving his wife a widow... how is this justifiable,” questions Anitha, Anandan’s elder sister, who is still coming to terms with his death.
“In the last 20 years, 23 people have been gunned down by the police in the state and every case of encounter is justified as self-defence. But the human rights commission has given guidelines that an FIR should be filed and only after the trial, it can be proved that the policemen involved in the case is innocent. Killing an alleged suspect is not right,” said Justice K Chandru, a former judge of the Madras High Court.
“Normally, such encounters are done to put in fear in the minds of people. A few years ago, the stretch from Gandhi Mandapam to Nandanam was closed and the police shot down a suspect. Who decides this? Mere magistrate inquiries will not help. With increasing crime rates, police want to prove that they have a hold on things. The sad part is that, the public buy this version and praise the officers, and also seek instant justice,” he added.
This incident started on Monday night, when the Royapettah police station received a call that a gang of men were harassing women near P M Daragh. The police constable, Rajavel, had gone alone to the spot for inquiry when he was severely hacked by a group of men. According to police sources, Anandan was the one who inflicted several cuts on the policeman’s head while his friend held the constable tight. He wanted to strike fear into the police force.
The police arrested six men the same night, including Aravindan, allegedly a notorious history-sheeter. The next day, Aravindan led them to a place at Sholinganallur, where four more accused were hiding. “Anandan claimed that constable Rajavel’s walkie-talkie (which was lost during Monday’s assault) was kept near the Central Polytechnic College at Taramani and hence the police team took him there around 8.30 pm. At the spot, he managed to free himself and picked up a knife and attacked sub-inspector Ilayaraja. So assistant commissioner Sudarshan had to fire at him,” said a senior police officer.
The official version of encounters of this sort — acting in self-defence — is a right available to all citizens. But, what they fail to notice is the Supreme Court’s ruling, which states that the right of self or private defence falls in one basket and use of excessive or retaliatory force falls in another basket. Therefore, while a victim of aggression has the right of private or self-defence (recognized by Sections 96 to 106 of the Indian Penal Code), if that victim exceeds the right of private or self-defence by using excessive or retaliatory force, he then becomes an aggressor and commits a punishable offence.
In 2014, the Supreme Court said that police officials involved in encounter killings shall not be rewarded till their gallantry is established beyond doubt.
Former Madras HC judge D Hariparanthaman asks how much damage can Anandan cause, even with a knife, to a group of. Police resorting to encounter, even for self-defence, is against the civil society. “There is a difference. In Jammu and Kashmir, for example, army personnel are dealing with terrorists who have bombs and guns and there, the army resorts to encounter killing,” he added.He further points out that these days, encounters and custodial deaths are common in India, which is a challenge to democracy. “Courts have already given solutions to file FIRs and to form a committee, with those who were not part of the operation, to investigate the case. Members of human rights organisations have been fighting for this and many FIRs have been filed, but practically no action has been taken against policemen,” he added.
“In Anandan’s case, the police could have filed an ‘attempt-to-murder’ case, which would have resulted in 10-year imprisonment or even life,” he points out.Former DGP R Natraj, however, paints a different picture. “In encounter cases, the situation on the ground should be analysed. No encounter is planned. It happens when the police try to protect themselves. But they should use force and shooting should be the last resort. The public these days also have accepted that encounters are a form of speedy justice and blame the police for not doing so. It is a very delicate situation. Police have to keep in mind public demand and the law. But they first should act by the law. It should be noted that police upload human rights,” said.
Meanwhile, on the day of the encounter, students who passed by CPT campus in Taramani, narrate another tale. “Yesterday, at around 1.30 pm, police personnel had chased us all off and barricaded this place. Later, many senior police officers visited the spot and police cars were parked. But it was only later in the night, we released that an encounter had happened in the scene,” a student seeking anonymity said. Similarly, most of the suspects who are nabbed by the police suffer a hand or leg fracture and the official version is that they sustained the injury while trying to escape.
For instance, on January 4 this year, two mobile videos of youngsters on their motorbikes dragging police barricades on Kamarajar Salai and Gandhi Mandapam Road at Kotturpuram went viral on social networking sites. A few days later, the boys were arrested, and their hands were found to be broken.
Another recent trend is police recording videos in which the suspects confess to their crime. After police stormed a birthday bash organised for notorious rowdy Binu, a video was released in which he confessed to his mistakes.
V Suresh, national secretary of PUCL (People’s Union for Civil Liberties), said in cases of encounter, a separate FIR should be filed and an officer from another agency or cell should probe the case. “Two things have to be noted — how the encounter is described and the encounter itself. The way this (Anandan) encounter was narrated is absurd. Encounter is a murder in itself and should not be used as a way of reform,” he added.
Pointing to the encounters in UP, he said around 1,100 encounters have been reported, in which 49 have died and more than 300 injured. “Citizens should awaken and start advocating for their democratic rights. It is dangerous for citizens to allow police to murder in the name of encounter. “In such cases, a magistrate inquiry is important to probe the cases pending against the victims who died, if they were punishable,and whether the police recorded the plan of the encounter in advance or a comparison of weapons available with the police as well as the victim is done, ” said Suresh.
Some SC guidelines regarding encounters
If pursuant to a tip-off the police uses firearms and this results in death of a person, then an FIR must be registered
Disciplinary action against and suspension of a police officer found guilty of wrongful encounter
Police officers must surrender their weapons for investigation
No out of turn gallantry awards for the officers involved in encounter killings
In movies...
From Nayagan to Theeran, encounters and police brutality have been glorified and justified. Encounters look cool and provide instant justice. In most of these films, the police always consider themselves above the law
“Cinemas being a huge influence on the public, it sends out wrong messages when encounters are portrayed as solutions to reform other criminals or alleged suspects. The film makers have to be more sensitive in such issues,” said R Vinayaga Vishnu, senior advocate with the Madras High Court
In Kaakha Kaakha, Suriya guns down a rapist and justifies it by saying the court proceeding would take time. In Vettaiyadu Vilayadu, Kamal goes to USA and convinces a foreigner to break into a house without a warrant
The brutality has been glorified and make the people lose hope in the judicial system. Visaranai, on the other hand, takes the opposite approach, showing brutality and killings in bad light