#Jacob Peenikaparambil

Bhopal | The increasing number of the so-called encounter deaths raises the question, “can extrajudicial killing be justified? After the murder of gangster-politician Atiq Ahmed and his brother Ashraf in a police cordon in Prayagraj on the night of April 15, the issue of extra-judicial killing has become alive in the media.

As reported in the media since 2017, 183 encounter killings or extrajudicial deaths have taken place in UP, and the list include the son of Atiq Ahamed and his associate who were gunned down in Jhansi two days before the killing of Atiq and his brother.

The cold-blooded murder of Atiq Ahmad and his brother from a point-blank range and in the presence of armed policemen, leaves many questions unanswered. Many have asked whether it was a planned encounter killing or a murder by three misguided youths. The two brothers were killed when they were taken for medical check-upat an odd time, 10 pm on 15th April. It is quite unusual to take the accused persons for medical check-up at night. Atiq and Ashraf were on a four-day police custody remand in the Umesh Pal murder case.

According to a version given by the police, Atiq and Ashraf complained of uneasiness and a team of policemen, headed by SHO Maurya took them to Moti Lal Nehru Zonal Hospital for medical check-up. A question arises how both brothers complained of uneasiness at the same time. This version appears to be unbelievable.

As reported in the media, there was enough space before the hospital for parking the police vehicle in which the accused were taken. But instead of taking them till the hospital entrance in an ambulance, they were paraded to the hospital on foot. It was a serious lapse on the part of the Police to make high-profile criminals walk, exposing them to high risk. What was the need for allowing the journalists to take bites from the accused? The assailants, because of the police’s lapse, were able to disguise themselves as journalists and could shoot at the duo from a close range.

Another question is related to the failure of the police to check and verify the ID of the journalists while allowing them to interact with the accused. The three assailants had false IDs of journalists and a camera.

Yet another security lapse pointed out by many is that the police force of 20 was quite inadequate, taking into account the serious threats Atiq Ahmad had faced. Secondly, the killers fired as many as 20 rounds, but not a single bullet was fired by the policemen. Atiq and Ashraf fell to the ground after headshots. The visuals show the shooters closing in raining bullets on them. Still, not a shot was fired by the cops; why?

Because of the above-mentioned lapses on the part of the police, many presume that it could be an extra-judicial murder. It is to be remembered that Atiq Ahmed himself had pleaded in the Supreme Court for security, apprehending his own murder. The SC refused to hear him. It said that he was under the protection of the state. The fear of Atiq turned out to be true on 15th April night. The UP government miserably failed to protect him.

What has happened in the murder of Atiq and Ashraf is killing the rule of law. The rule of law states clearly that it is not the task of the government to judge and punish a person; it is the task of the judiciary. The role of the government is to prosecute a person who has committed a crime by following the due process of law and to bring him/her before the court. The encounter deaths or extra judicial killings taking place in U P and some other states are a blatant violation of the rule of law.

The UP government has the responsibility to arrest a gangster like Atiq Ahmad and present him before the court, but it has no right to eliminate him. "Eliminating crime does not mean killing criminals. The court is there to provide justice,'' Mr Tejaswi Yadav said, reacting to the gruesome incident. One of the terrorists, Ajmal Amir Kasab, who was caught in the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attack, was punished only after the due process of law that took about four years.Rule of law says that no one has the right to take another's life without recourse to due process of law.

There is no question of justifying the crimes committed by Atiq Ahmad and his family members. They are to be given the highest punishment as per the law of the land. But no government has the right to eliminate anyone accused of crime. If the government becomes the prosecutor and the judge, it will lead to gross human rights violations. The rule by gun should not be preferred to the “rule of law”. The fundamental premise of the rule of law is that every human being, including the worst criminal, is entitled to basic human rights and due process.