Encounter killings are cold-blooded murders committed by men in uniform. The people shot dead are not killed in the heat of a battle or during action requiring self-defence; they are killed in a planned, pre-meditated manner in much the same way that the mafia does its 'eliminations'...We have refused to face this ugly truth for far too long. It's about time it was faced fairly and squarely.
The Gujarat police 'Encounter' with Ishrat Johan, her husband Javed Shaikh and two other men (Amjad Ali Rana and Zeeshan Jauhar) raised uncomfortable questions five years ago when the killings occurred. This had partly to do with the Gujarat police's role in the state sponsored Gujarat pogrom of 2002, which clearly established that most of the force, including its senior officers, were communal in the extreme.
It also had to do with the suspicious nature of this particular case, where the four victims were dubbed LeT operators with no proof being given to establish that as fact. The Encounter too looked completely stage-managed and badly stage-managed at that.
Now a Gujarat magistrate's probe has clearly established that the victims "were not linked to LeT as claimed by the police." Magistrate S P Tamang's report also said that the police had shot the victims in cold blood using their service revolver. It said that the encounter was 'planned and executed mercilessly' by shooting the victims from close range. It further stated that the weapon was 'planted' in the hand of a victim to buttress the encounter story.
We know, of course, that encounter killings are not a speciality of Gujarat. The method was used extensively in Punjab when the Khalistani movement had unleashed unspeakable violence against the civilian population.It was also used in Maharashtra, particularly, in Mumbai, to eliminate the underworld.
However reprehensible and illegal these killings were,they differed from the Gujarat encounters in two significant ways. The first was that they were not officially sanctioned; the governments may have turned a convenient blind eye to them, but they did not back them the way the Gujarat government has done.
A minister (Jaynarayan Vyas) has spokenagainst the magistrate's findings and has announced the government's intentions to appeal against the report in the high court. There have been many earlier cases of the same kind too, and only in one case (the fake encounter in which Soharabuddin and his wife Kauser Bi were killed), has the Gujarat government actually distanced itself from the policemen.
That's not all: there have been well-documented instances of upright police officialslike ADGB RB Sreekumar andIG Geeta Johri who opposed this policy, being transferred to 'punishment' postings.
The second difference between thePunjab/Maharashtra encounters and the Gujarat ones was that the former were for a 'higher cause' (the elimination of the Khalistani militants and the mafia respectively), while the Gujarat encounters were staged by officers likeAhmedabad police commissioner K R Kaushik, DIGG D Vanzara, ICP Crime, PP Pande, ACPGL Singhal and ACP NK Amin, purely for personal gain.
There can of course, be no 'higher cause' which can justify extra-judicial killings. Once policemen find that they can get away with cold-blooded murder, they use it with impunity to get rid of people they deem suspicious.
It is now well-known that rogue cops in Punjab and Maharashtra used threats of encounter killings toblackmail innocent people and amass wealth for themselves. That's why it's time for Chidambaram to step in and announce that under no circumstances will fake encounters be condoned.
And the policemen found guilty of taking part in them will be tried for murder. That's the only way to stop the killing of those who are innocent and just happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.
Readers' comments:
One can expect this type of venomous, stupid writing only from a fellow whose wife is (or was?) a Pakistani and whose daughter carries a Muslim name. He is just a male version of Teesta Setalvad, whom, too, nobody takes seriously. Please avoid imposing fellows like Anil Dharker on the readers.
Friday, September 18, 2009 10:24 IST
S.S.Nagaraj, Bangalore
Don't think it's worth commenting on the general journalistic standards in India, but it's really pathetic to see a supposedly well- known columnist like Mr Dharker also descending to the same depths. People like him who are supposed to be opinion- builders need to act more responsibly and confirm the veracity of facts before expressing their opinion. As we all know, this matter is sub-judice and the credibility of the report on which Mr Dharker has based his article has been questioned by the Gujarat high court. In that context, using findings from that report and presenting them as absolute facts reeks of weak jounalistic and moral standards. It's indeed shameful that Mr Dharker did not care to wait for the facts to be cleared up before naming specific officers in his article. If this case is about "fake encounters", isn't what Mr Dharker and journalists like him are doing also a "fake encounter" of people's reputation, using unsubstantiated and disputed information? Wonder if some remedial action should be taken against people like him?!
Thursday, September 17, 2009 13:05 IST
Ashish, Delhi
Mr. Dharker had always been sympathetic to the Muslim cause and no one can help it if journalists like him keep spewing venom against the BJP. If he wishes to bring this incident under the scanner he should also talk of the Sangli riots last week when the same state-sponsored police forced immersions of Ganesh idols and allowed Muslim youth to plant green flags on their vehicles. The order of things seems quite clear and also what's clear is that Mr Dharker seems to be a something in a garb of a something!
Tuesday, September 15, 2009 13:11 IST
Ramesh Sahni,
Please see what the terrorists have also done, please write an article so they stop bothering innocent civilians, stop bombing trains, stop creating havoc in Punjab, then Kashmir, Assam, then in Delhi, Bangalore. Please show proof that they have been given justice then you can stand on behalf of LeT and write such an inspiring article. Good journalists write for justice for the masses.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009 9:51 IST
Santosh, Mumbai
Can you calm down? Kindly refer to what Jay Narayan Vyas has to say about it. The magistrate was a little over enthusiastic in that he did not even let the so called "accused" have a say in court. He is not the sole deciding authority on what happened, there is a court and justices who are looking into it. On top of that you think you are the authority to decide that the 2002 Gujarat riots were a state sponsored pogrom? Please submit the evidence you have and then we can move on for god's sake. You know what a state sponsered progrom is? 1984 Sikh riots, wonder why that doesn't find any mention here. Talk about journalistic bias, my god!
Monday, September 14, 2009 23:00 IST
ChennaiPolitico, chennai
Email
Print
Share
