Allahabad HC criticises Uttar Pradesh Police for practice of shooting accused persons in legs

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday strongly criticised the Uttar Pradesh Police for its alleged practice of shooting accused persons in the legs and portraying such incidents as gunfights, Bar and Bench reported.

The bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal sought explanations from the state’s Director General of Police Rajiv Krishna and Additional Chief Secretary (Home) Sanjay Prasad.

The officers were directed to appear before the court through video conference on Friday. They were asked to state whether any verbal or written directions had been issued to police personnel to shoot accused persons in the legs or otherwise, and claim the incidents to be gunfights.

In its Wednesday order, the court observed that gunfights with security forces, particularly incidents that involve firing at the legs of accused persons, appeared to have become a routine, Bar and Bench reported.

The bench said that the action were ostensibly carried out to please superior officers or to teach the accused persons a so-called lesson. “Such conduct is wholly impermissible, as the power to punish lies exclusively within the domain of the courts and not with the police,” the order was quoted as having stated.

Deshwal said that India, as a democratic country, is governed by the rule of law with clearly defined roles for the executive, legislature and judiciary, and that any encroachment by the police into the judicial domain cannot be accepted.

He further observed that some police personnel may be misusing their authority to attract attention from senior officers or to create public sympathy by projecting incidents as gunfights.

The bench made the observations while hearing bail petitions filed by three persons who had been injured in separate alleged incidents of gunfight with the police.

The court noted that no police officer had suffered injuries in the incidents, leading to questions about the necessity and proportionality of the use of firearms.

In one case, the court had earlier sought details on whether a first information report had been registered and whether the injured person’s statement had been recorded before a magistrate or medical officer.

The state informed the court that while an FIR had been registered, no statement had been recorded, and that the investigation had initially been handled by a sub-inspector before being reassigned to an inspector.

Taking note of this, the court held that the Supreme Court’s guidelines on gunfights had not been followed.

The court directed the director general of police and additional chief secretary (home) to clarify whether any instructions had been issued to ensure compliance with the Supreme Court’s guidelines on the registration of FIRs, recording of statements and investigation procedures in cases of death or grievous injury during gunfights with the police.

During the hearing on Friday, Deshwal also raised concerns about police officers pressuring judicial officers, particularly chief judicial magistrates, to pass specific orders, Bar and Bench reported.

He said the court could not allow Uttar Pradesh to become a police state.

The judge stressed that there must be mutual respect between the police and the judiciary, and that a police officer should not consider himself superior to a judicial officer, Bar and Bench reported.

“Power to punish is in the domain of judiciary and not with the police,” the court underscored.

Krishna assured the court that instructions would be issued to ensure protocol and adherence to the law. “Majesty of law is supreme, there is no doubt about that,” he was quoted as saying.