New Delhi: A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking issuance of specific directions in the custodial killing/ encounter of accused Rakesh Pandey yesterday and for the registration of FIR under Sections 302, 201, 120-B, 193 of the Indian Penal Code against the police officials involved in custodial killing/alleged encounter.
The petition filed by Advocate Vishal Tiwari also seeks the setting up of a Commission headed by a retired Judge of the Supreme Court for enquiry and investigation into the said killings.
The petition refers to the ‘encounter’ killing of Rakesh Pandey, alias Hanuman Pandey. The Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force (STF) gunned down Rakesh Pandey, an accused in the 2005 murder case of BJP leader Krishnanand Rai, in an encounter near Sarojini Nagar Police Station in Lucknow Kanpur Highway.
The police version is that they were looking for Rakesh Pandey since long. On August 9, they received secret information regarding his location. The STF team went to arrest him and while chasing the vehicle in which Pandey was travelling, it collided with a tree. Rakesh Pandey, who was still in the vehicle, opened fire on police and in retaliation the police shot at him.
The petitioner has alleged that it becomes doubtful that for last so many years the police failed to trace him and suddenly in present time when encounters are in vogue in UP, they received information about his whereabouts and killed him. It is also said that four others who were along with Rakesh Pandey in the same vehicle managed to escape.The entire incident, according to the petitioner, appears to be false and is an extra judicial killing suppressing the rule of law.
Referring to encounter cases like the Ishrat Jahan encounter case in 2004, Gujarat, Sohrabuddin encounter case in 2005, Rajasthan, Dara Singh encounter in 2006, Rajasthan, Hyderabad encounter case in 2019, Telangana, Vikas Dubey and his other relatives encounter case in 2020, Uttar Pradesh, the petitioner has submitted that “90 percent of encounter cases have been proved fake or doubtful. The public do not support criminals in society, but the public also does not support the police committing illegal activities.”
The petitioner has further submitted that in People’s Union for civil liberties and Another versus State of Maharashtra and others, the Supreme courtlaid down 16-point guidelines in relation to police encounter which requires to followed Strictly in these encounter cases.
– India Legal Bureau