MADURAI: Encounter deaths and instances of accused sustaining injuries during their escape attempt must be taken note of seriously and investigated thoroughly, as it tends to show a lack of faith by the law enforcement agency in the Rule of Law, Constitutional Rights and Protection and the Criminal Justice System, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court said on Friday.
Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing a criminal petition filed by A Guruvammal in 2010, seeking directions to register an FIR against policemen who killed her son Murugan alias Kallumandaiyan, and another accused, Kaviarasu, on February 16, 2010, in an encounter and entrust the investigation to an independent agency such as the CBI.
The belief that instant death is an appropriate punishment and has a deterrent effect is only a myth. Despite Tamil Nadu being one of the better law-enforcing states, the disturbing trend of dangerous criminals trying to attack police and then being shot dead or injured has increased. The immediate society affected by the offence lauds such killings without realising it is fundamentally wrong, the court stated.
According to the petitioner, then Assistant Commissioner Velladurai led a team that shot and killed Kallumandaiyan and Kaviarasu under the Teppakulam police station limits and a case was registered under sections 332,324 and 307 of IPC and 174 of CrPC.
The version of the officers concerned was that they were wanted criminals, and while Kaviarasu had 75 pending cases, Kallumandaiyan had 25 pending cases at the time of the encounter. The police claimed that the accused attacked them and were shot at in self-defence.
As a counter-response, the petitioner asked why they were not shot in other parts of the body. In 2017, the case was handed over to the CB-CID and the case was re-registered and investigated. They highlighted the findings of the State Human Rights Commission that the incident was a fake encounter.
The court said the investigation was initially conducted by the Teppakulam police inspector and a CB-CID inspector later, who both were below the rank of Velladurai against whom the investigation was carried out. Hence, both investigations are inconsequential and the final reports are illegal and have been set aside. A fresh inquiry has to be conducted by an officer in the rank of the superintendent of police or above.
The court said Velladurai alone was involved in 10 encounters, and it has to be thoroughly investigated whether the officer repeatedly indulged in self-defence or was just a trigger-happy officer. The court directed the DGP to depute an officer above the rank of Velladurai in CB-CID to investigate the case, adding that the fresh investigation shall be completed within six months.
‘Was it always self-defence’
The court said Assistant Commissioner Velladurai alone was involved in 10 encounters, and it has to be thoroughly investigated whether the officer repeatedly indulged in self-defence or was just a trigger-happy officer