A “JUSTIFIED” CRIME :
Police brutality is depicted as a method promoting the idea of “instant justice”. However, the concept of Quo Warranto (latin maxim for “by what authority”) comes into picture, considering the fact that it oversteps on the fundamental roles of courts or quite literally known as the “justice system” of the country. Although, the latter doesn’t seem to be doing its duty quite efficiently as we are very well aware of the great history of the piled up cases and the never ending loopholes that sort of comes complimentary to any Government organisation. However, this in no way justifies the inhumane culture of police brutality, that has been so widely accepted by the people that it seems as an alternative dispute resolution to the long lasting court trials.
HYPOCRITICAL APPROACH:
There have been various protests against this rising injustice, especially during the worldwide lockdown period. However, I do feel there is some sense of hypocrisy attached to the opinions of the so called “woke” people who tend to have a different opinion when it comes to raising their voice on social media and a completely different reaction when the same concept is showcased and applauded in the entertainment sector, for example, in Bollywood movies like Singham, Simba, Dabbang etc. When the same concept is portrayed in an entertaining way, it is well praised. The protagonists of these movies are idealised and followed, since the encounters or torture that they succumb, is towards the “guilty”. But again, the police is not the deciding authority.
CONCEPT OF FAIR TRIAL:
There is a reason why, “statements given by the accused while under police custody are inadmissible in the court of law”. One of the principles of natural justice,” Audi Alteram Partem” which states that, no one should be condemned unheard. Irrespective of how strong evidence is there, against the accused, each party deserves a fair and formal trial with a proper legal representation. For example all the police encounters that take place may appear to be fair prima facie, however, these cannot only be used as a tool for “instant justice” but also for instant promotions or sudden increase in the credibility of the police department. We all lashed out at George Floyd’s case, but what about the recent Hyderabad rape case of Priyanka Reddy where the accused were shot dead in a “police encounter”. Most of us felt relieved saying “inke saath toh yeh hi hona chahiye”. Although, the “accused” were unarmed in that case, there was no threat to the police, so what was the need to kill them? The rage in a heinous crime like rape is justified, however, we forget the fact that they were the “accused” and not the “convicts”, again the basic principle of law saying “innocent until proven guilty”.
CONCLUSION:
The Priyanka Reddy rape case (encounter) is one such example, there are hundreds of such cases that occur every day. Fake encounter, torture while in custody ( Jairaj and fenix) or oppression based on race ( George Floyd) are daily occurring and only few make it to the limelight. One of the basic steps that has to be taken by us is to sensitise people about the lawlessness of this act and how power does not give you the right to misuse it and exploit the vulnerable. Stop promoting this inhumane behaviour by being aware of your rights and calling out these personnels on such acts.The essence of our constitution and the judiciary is “May the 100 guilty be free but one innocent should not be convicted or punished“.
Eduindex News 