… Because instant justice is important
For Printing Download Epaper from files section from bottom of this page
Supreme court’s findings about Hyderabad police in a case happened two years ago may be legally very correct. But why Hyderabad police took this extreme step to kill rapists on the spot in the garb of taking them to crime scene can’t be exactly established. The reason may be that at that time, police were under social criticism about increasing incidents of rapes and murders. To clean their image, they might have taken the step. But the real reason for which police action was praised because justice being given is important. In the lengthy and time consuming legalities, ten to fifteen years are generally wasted as we commonly observe in any small case. This was serious case of rape and murder of a doctor. So, police took this mindless action but it should not be forgotten that people widely supported their moves. Because everybody has experienced at one or another point of life, how getting instant justice very difficult if not impossible. It is not wonder that police action got tremendous support from people. The Supreme Court-appointed inquiry commission’s findings that the Telangana police killed in cold blood the four accused arrested for the two thousand and nineteen gangrape and murder of a twenty six -year-old veterinarian, along with its recommendation of murder charges against ten cops, sends a clear message that the rule of law has to be upheld even while dealing with people who commit the gravest of offences. The Justice VS Sirpurkar panel’s observation that the accused were deliberately fired at when they were taken to the crime scene with an intent to cause their death, followed by the attempt to falsify the records to shield the police team, alludes to the ‘instant justice’ template that has come to be associated with the law-enforcement agencies. The rape-and-murder case in Hyderabad had sent shockwaves and as the police detailed the graphic sequences of the crime, there were few murmurs of protest over the swift action against the accused despite the apparent improbability of the version that the four assaulted the policemen and attempted to escape. As public frenzy subsided and facts emerged, the police version that shaped public opinion began to crumble. The slow-moving judicial processes and the painstaking task of collecting and presenting evidence cannot become a ruse to turn the criminal justice system into a police Raj dispensing tit-for-tat, instant, vigilante response. Extra-judicial killings and fake encounters cannot be seen in isolation. These are the by-products of a criminal justice system that is under-staffed and overburdened, that often fails to deliver, and the frustration can infuse the scary belief within the ranks that crime can only be controlled by circumventing the law. Unless these aspects are suitably addressed, despite landmark court rulings and exemplary punishment, the propensity of trigger-happy cops to tinker with the law to get ‘results’ may not see much change. Criminal justice system should be fulfilled with enough judges and support staff and there should not be heaps of unheard litigations in every department. The court says that, enough judges are not there in the system and due to their less number, the huge piles of litigations to be heard are increasing. Unless these issues are solved, police due to various reasons, make attempts to give instant justice to victims and that is not wrong at all. The supreme court also take this issues into account. There is no intention to oppose Court observation, but the facts should be considered with equal sympathy. Justice is not considered as it is if it is delivered after ten years. Justice should be given immediately.