New Delhi: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan Friday expressed concern over the alleged assault of protesters by police personnel during the recent NEET students’ protest at Jantar Mantar, saying the detachment expected of police officers appears to be disappearing.
Speaking at the launch of former secretary (security) Yashovardhan Azad’s book “Policing the Republic”, Justice Bhuyan said, “All of us are dismayed when we see young officers of the Indian Police Service personally going and assaulting protesters and demonstrators. This is something very, very distressing to observe.”
“The detachment expected of police officers somehow seems to be disappearing, and this is indeed a matter of grave concern,” he added.
The book launch was held at Viceroy Hall in the national capital. Congress MP P Chidambaram, former Maharashtra DGP D Sivanandhan and others were present at the event.
Justice Bhuyan said that effective policing could be done without resorting to the excessive use of force or infringement of human rights.
“For most common people, a policeman on the street wearing a whistle and a lathi represents the power and authority of the state. When they feel wronged, they seek the help of the police. It is, therefore, of utmost importance that the police force maintains its credibility,” he said.
“It can do so only by strictly adhering to the Constitution, by functioning as a truly professional force, acting impartially, displaying courage and acting with conviction, maintaining integrity and adhering to secular principles, thereby upholding the rule of law,” he added.
He also mentioned the rising cases of custodial torture and deaths in the country and said it is one of the worst crimes in a civilised society.
“Custodial death is perhaps one of the worst crimes in a civilised society governed by the rule of law. Any form of torture, of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment would fall within the inhibition of Article 29, whether it occurs during investigation, interrogation or otherwise,” he said.
He pointed that when functionaries of government become lawbreakers, it can encourage lawlessness.
“If the functionaries of the government become lawbreakers, it is bound to breed contempt for the law and will encourage lawlessness. No civilised nation can permit that to happen.
“Does a citizen sheds off his fundamental right the moment a policeman arrests him?” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also invoked the Supreme Court’s 1997 judgment in D K Basu vs State of West Bengal, saying the court had made it clear that any form of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment would fall within the constitutional protection of fundamental rights, irrespective of whether it occurred during investigation, interrogation or otherwise.
Justice Bhuyan said the court had posed a fundamental question — whether a citizen sheds his fundamental rights the moment he is arrested by a policeman and whether the right to life can be put in abeyance on arrest.
“The answer indeed has to be an emphatic no,” he said.
He noted that the D K Basu judgment had laid down a slew of directions concerning arrest and interrogation, and also recognised the need to compensate victims whose human rights were violated.
Moving to the issue of extra-judicial killings or “fake encounters”, he said the Supreme Court had taken a serious view of such incidents.
Referring to a 2011 judgment, he said the court had held that fake encounters “nullify the very essence of the rule of law” and observed that when a fake encounter is proved against a serving policeman in a trial, it must be treated with the utmost seriousness.
“Encounter philosophy is a criminal philosophy. It cannot be a part of policing,” Justice Bhuyan said.
He also spoke about the need for police reforms and the dangers of political interference in the functioning of the police.
Justice Bhuyan referred to the National Police Commission, appointed by the government in 1977 to examine the role and performance of the police both as a law-enforcement agency and as an institution tasked with protecting citizens’ constitutional rights.
The commission submitted several reports to the government, including its final report in May 1981. Its recommendations covered issues ranging from mechanisms for dealing with complaints of police misconduct to ensuring professional independence for the police, he said.
Justice Bhuyan referred to the Supreme Court’s 2006 judgment in Prakash Singh and others, which dealt with police reforms and followed the non-implementation of the National Police Commission’s recommendations.
He said the judgment had warned against excessive political and administrative control over the police, noting that such control could turn the force into a tool for subverting the rule of law and undermine democracy.
The Supreme Court had accordingly issued a series of directions, including for the constitution of state security commissions, selection and minimum tenure of the director general of police (DGP), separation of investigation from other police functions, establishment of police establishment boards and police complaints authorities.
The judge also referred to the chapter on Manipur in “Policing the Republic”, describing the state as exceptionally rich in talent and culture but expressing concern over the continuing violence there.
Despite the extensive presence of security forces, including the state police, Manipur Rifles, Assam Rifles, paramilitary forces and the Army, “peace continues to remain elusive” in the state, he said.
“There is a lesson for all of us. There is a lesson for India,” Justice Bhuyan said, referring to the violence in Manipur.
