Every society requires tranquilly and favourable conditions to advance. Disrupted and anarchic civilizations tend to devote all of their resources to unimportant endeavours. On the other hand, kids can develop and flourish if they have a sense of safety, security, and order. Herein lies the significance of the police in society. This system existed at all eras, in one form or another, with varying roles and obligations.

1. Police Capabilities Regarding
Encounters
Every society requires tranquilly and favourable conditions to advance. Disrupted and
anarchic civilizations tend to devote all of their resources to unimportant endeavours. On the
other hand, kids can develop and flourish if they have a sense of safety, security, and order.
Herein lies the significance of the police in society. This system existed at all eras, in one
form or another, with varying roles and obligations.
The word 'police' comes from the Latin word 'politia,' which signifies the state of a nation.
The phrase refers to a set of rules for maintaining order and regulating the law. It basically
refers to the deliberate preservation of public order and the protection of individuals and
property against criminal acts committed against them.
Also Check: Supreme Courts Judgement Online
It also refers to the civil officials who are responsible for keeping public order and safety,
upholding the law, and preventing and detecting crime. This work becomes more challenging
in a multicultural, multiethnic, and enormous country with a large population, such as India.
The science of preserving peace and order in a dynamic society is policing. Consequently,
the policing ideology, policing practises, and attitudes of those in charge of policing must
change.
Since the late 20th century, the phrase encounter killing has been used in India and Pakistan
to characterise extrajudicial executions by the police or armed forces, ostensibly in
self-defense, when they confront suspected criminals or terrorists. Critics are sceptical of the
police motivation behind a number of these recorded occurrences, and allege that the
widespread acceptance of this terrible practise has led to instances of the police creating
phoney confrontations to cover-up the death of individuals who were either in custody or
unarmed.
According to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), fraudulent encounters are
occasionally organised by police officers due to political masters' demand to produce rapid
results by any means necessary. According to the NHRC's 2011 guidebook on human rights
for police personnel, the public, particularly the educated middle class, does not mind if the
police take the law into their own hands and become executioners, particularly with
reference to feared criminals.
The second factor highlighted by the NHRC is that the country's sluggish criminal justice
system exacerbates the police predicament. The duration of trials is virtually interminable,
and the conclusion is unpredictable, especially in regards to the offenders who possess
wealth, political influence, and physical might. Consequently, the police are under pressure
to use shortcuts and illegal techniques. Very frequently, there is both political boss
conspiracy and public backing.

2. Political leaders, public personalities, and the general populace have applauded the capture
of criminal Vikas Dubey and his colleagues in light of the mounting concern and unease in
the country over the escalating number of encounters. In addition, questions have been
raised about the legality and appropriateness of the police action, resulting in a debate about
whether a democratic country should follow constitutional norms and adhere to the due
process of law or adopt measures of retributive justice to bring swift and instant justice to the
victims.
It is acknowledged that encounters are one of the most significant and pervasive problems in
our society. In a democratic nation like India, it is accountable for a huge number of
extrajudicial killings, which is a tragic truth. This study presents, describes, analyses,
investigates, and discusses Encounters in order to examine and expand existing
understanding on the state of Encounters in India.
Relevant Laws
As long as the right to genuine self-defense is involved, Indian law does authorise police
officers and citizens to murder another person.
Article 21 of the Constitution, however, states:
Protection of life and personal liberty - No individual should be deprived of his life or liberty
unless in accordance with the legal process.
Although there is no provision in Indian law that expressly allows interactions with criminals,
there are enabling clauses that may be construed in a variety of ways to grant police
personnel the authority to deal with criminals.
In practically every situation when a police officer has been involved in an altercation, he or
she acted in "self-defense."
Section 96 of the Criminal Code of India
Things done in private defense.-Nothing done in the exercise of the right to private defence
constitutes an offence.
According to section 100 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), it is illegal to possess a firearm.
When the right of private defence of the body extends to causing death.-The right of private
defence of the body extends, subject to the restrictions mentioned in the previous section, to
the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the assailant, if the offence which
gives rise to the exercise of the right is of any of the following descriptions:
Assaults that are capable of causing reasonable anxiety that death will otherwise be the
result;
Assaults that might plausibly lead to the belief that grave harm will otherwise result from the
attack.
An attack committed with the purpose to commit a rape;
An attack committed with the goal to satisfy unnatural passion;
An attack committed with the purpose to kidnap or abduct;
Assault with the aim to unlawfully confine a person, under conditions that may reasonably
lead him to believe he would be unable to seek release from the public authorities.

3. IPC Section 97 states:
The right to defend one's body and property privately.
Subject to the constraints outlined in section 99, everyone has the right to defend:
His own body, as well as the bodies of others, against any offence against the human body;
The property, whether mobile or immovable, of oneself or any other person, against any act
constituting a theft, robbery, mischief, or criminal trespass offence, or an attempt to commit
such an offence.
This includes:
Section 102 of the Criminal Code of India
The beginning and continuation of the body's right to private defence. -The right of private
defence of the body began as soon as a reasonable apprehension of risk to the body
emerges from an effort or threat to commit the offence, even if the offence has not yet been
committed; and it continues for as long as such apprehension of danger persists.
pertaining to the police
Article 46 of the 1973 Code of Criminal Procedure
46. How are arrests made?
In order to make an arrest, the police officer or other person performing the arrest must
physically touch or restrict the body of the person to be detained, unless the subject submits
verbally or physically.
If the individual violently resists or seeks to elude arrest, the police officer or other individual
may use all measures required to effectuate the arrest.
Nothing in this clause authorises the execution of a person who is not accused of a crime
punishable by death or life imprisonment.
300 of the Indian Penal Code – Murder
Exception 3.:
If the offender is a public servant or aids a public servant acting for the advancement of
public justice, exceeds the powers granted to him by law, and causes death by doing an act
that he, in good faith, believes to be lawful and necessary for the due discharge of his duty
as such public servant, and without malice towards the person whose death is caused, then
the homicide is not murder.
In the event that none of these laws can be invoked, the police officer responsible for the
killing of the accused would be prosecuted with culpable murder under Section 299 of the
Indian Penal Code. The justification for causing death during the contact will rely on the facts
revealed and accepted after a thorough inquiry. Moreover, if the police personnel are
convicted based on an inquiry, the deceased's family members must be compensated.
According to the Supreme Court, these are the guidelines for police encounter
investigations.
State of Maharashtra (2014) 10 SCC 635 = 2015 Cri.L.J. In People's Union for Civil Liberties
v. State of Maharashtra (2014) 10 SCC 635 = 2015 Cri.L.J. The Supreme Court issued the
following directives in 610:

4. Whenever the police receives information or a tip indicating criminal movements or actions
related to the conduct of a serious criminal offence, it must be committed to paper (ideally in
a case diary) or electronic form.
This recording need not reveal specifics about the suspect or the destination of the party. If
such intelligence or a tip is received by a higher authority, it may be recorded in some
manner without disclosing the suspect's identity or whereabouts.
If, according to the tip-off or receipt of any intelligence as described above, an encounter
occurs and the police party uses deadly force, resulting in a fatality, a FIR should be lodged
and sent to the court under Section 157 of the Code without delay. When transmitting the
Page 26 report pursuant to Section 157 of the Code, the method outlined in Section 158
must be followed.
The CID or police team of another police station will undertake an independent investigation
of the event or encounter under the direction of a senior officer (at least a level above the
head of the police party engaged in the encounter). At a minimum, the team conducting the
inquiry/investigation must:
For the purpose of identifying the victim, colour images should be obtained;
To retrieve and preserve evidence relating to the deceased, such as blood-stained soil, hair,
fibres and threads, etc.
To locate scene witnesses with complete names, addresses, and telephone numbers and to
get their testimonies (including police personnel's statements) regarding the death;
To ascertain the cause, method, place (including development of a rough sketch of the
area's topography and, if feasible, photo/video of the scene and any physical evidence), and
time of death, as well as any pattern or practise that may have contributed to the death;
It must be guaranteed that fingerprints of the deceased are transmitted for chemical analysis
in their whole. Other fingerprints must be identified, developed, lifted, and submitted for
chemical examination;
Post-mortem examinations must be performed by two doctors at the District Hospital, one of
whom should, wherever feasible, be the In-charge/Head of the District Hospital.
Post-mortem examinations should be videotaped and kept;
Guns, projectiles, bullets, and cartridge casings should be collected and stored as proof of
weaponry. Gunshot residue and trace metal detection should be undertaken whenever
applicable.
The reason of death should be determined, whether it was natural, accidental, intentional, or
unintentional.
In all situations of death resulting from police fire, an investigation must be conducted
pursuant to Section 176 of the Code, and a report must be delivered to the Judicial
Magistrate with authority pursuant to Section 190 of the Code.
Page 28 (5) The involvement of the NHRC is not required unless there are severe concerns
regarding the investigation's independence and impartiality.
However, the incidence must be reported without delay to the NHRC or the State Human
Rights Commission, as appropriate.
The wounded criminal or victim should get medical care, and the Magistrate or Medical
Officer should record his or her statement and provide a certificate of fitness.
It should be assured that the relevant Court receives the FIR, diary entries, panchnamas,
drawing, etc. without delay.

5. In accordance with Section 173 of the Code, the report shall be delivered to the relevant
court following a thorough investigation of the occurrence. According to the charge sheet
provided by the Investigating Officer, the trial must be ended quickly.
The next of kin of the suspected criminal/victim must be notified as soon as possible in the
case of death.
DGPs are required to provide the NHRC with six-monthly updates on all instances involving
police-involved fatalities. The six-monthly reports must be delivered to the NHRC by the 15th
of January and July, respectively. The statements may be delivered along with post mortem,
inquest, and, if available, inquiry reports in the following format:
Date and location of the event.
District Station, Police.
Causes of death: (a) Self-defense in a confrontation. b) During the dispersion of an unlawful
gathering. b) During the process of effecting an arrest.
Concise details about the occurrence.
Criminal Case No.
Investigating Agency.
Conclusions of the Magisterial Inquiry/Senior Officers' Inquiry:
Disclosing, in particular, the names and designations of police officers if they are found to be
responsible for the killing; and (b) determining whether the use of force was justifiable and
the conduct was legal.
Disciplinary action must be taken against the officer and he must be placed on suspension if,
upon completion of the inquiry, it is determined that a fatality resulted from the use of a
firearm constituting an offence under the Indian Penal Code.
The method outlined in Section 357-A of the Code must be implemented when
compensating the dependents of a victim who was killed during a confrontation with law
enforcement.
Subject to Article 20 of the Constitution, the involved police officer(s) must give his/her
weapons for forensic and ballistic investigation, as well as any additional evidence requested
by the investigative team.
The occurrence must also be communicated to the police officer's family, who must be
provided the services of a lawyer or counsellor if they require them.
No out-of-order promotions or instant valour awards shall be granted to the involved officers
immediately following the event. It must be guaranteed at all costs that such
awards/recommendations be given/made only when the valour of the respective officers is
beyond question.
The victim's family may file a complaint with the Sessions Judge with territorial jurisdiction
over the scene of the incident if it determines that the above procedure has not been
followed or that there is a pattern of abuse, lack of an independent investigation, or lack of
impartiality by any of the above-mentioned functionaries. Upon receipt of such a complaint,
the relevant Sessions Judge shall investigate its merits and remedy the issues mentioned
therein.
Guidelines For Police Encounter Investigations According To The National Human Rights
Commission
In March 1997, the then-chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC),
Justice M. N. Venkatachaliah, emphasised that the police do not have the authority to end a
person's life except in the following two instances: if the person is a threat to public safety or
if the police have reasonable grounds to believe that the person is a criminal.

6. If the death is the result of exercising the right to private defence.
Section 46 of the Criminal Procedure Code authorises the police to use force, up to and
including the use of lethal force, if required to apprehend a suspect suspected of a crime
punishable by death or life imprisonment.
In view of this, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) urged all states and Union
Territories to ensure that police adhere to the following set of principles in encounter killings:
Register:
When the commanding officer of a police station learns about a fatal incident, he must report
the facts in the relevant register.
Investigation:
Information received shall be deemed adequate to suspect, and prompt efforts must be
made to examine the pertinent events and circumstances leading up to the death in order to
determine if and by whom an offence was committed, if any.
Compensation:
It can be provided to the deceased's dependents if the police officers are charged based on
the investigation's findings.
Independent Agency:
When members of the encounter party are police officers from the same police station, it is
acceptable to send the cases for inquiry to an independent investigating agency, such as the
State CID.
In 2010, the NHRC expanded these guidelines by including the following:
Registering FIR:
When a complaint is filed against the police claiming the commission of a crime recognised
as a cognizable case of culpable murder, a FIR must be registered under the applicable IPC
provisions.
Magisterial Inquiry:
As soon as feasible, a magisterial investigation must be conducted in all instances when a
person dies as a result of police action (preferably within three months).
Following up with Commission:
Within 48 hours of the death, the Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police
of the District should provide a preliminary report to the Commission on all incidents of
police-involved deaths in the states.
Within three months, the Commission must receive a second report containing material such
as the post mortem report, the conclusions of the magisterial inquiry/inquiry by senior
officials, etc.
The rules issued by the Supreme Court state that the NHRC's participation is not required
unless there are strong concerns that the probe was not impartial.
Conclusion
As a law student, I believe that encounter murders must be examined independently
because they undermine the integrity of the Rule of Law. There is a need to guarantee that
the rule of law exists in society and is adhered to by all State authorities and the populace.
There is an urgent need for a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system and the
implementation of necessary police reforms. We must maintain the adequate physical
custody of the accused in order to prevent any act of personal retribution against police
officers.

7. The National Human Rights Commission agrees that the police lack a standard operating
procedure for responding swiftly to panic situations. Therefore, it is necessary to establish
standard rules for the police personnel's training and provide them with the relevant abilities
so that they can properly deal with every terrifying and stressful circumstance. The
Commission has urged law enforcement officials to bear human rights in mind while
interacting with arrested individuals/people.
For a few of families, the only remedy for horrific and cold-blooded acts is death. However,
popular attitudes that equate sluggish legal decisions and justice with swift retaliation are
neither moral nor justifiable.
Even if the ever-increasing number of crimes has produced an atmosphere of dread and
pain, the death of an accused person might send the incorrect message to society.
Therefore, it is the moral duty of the state to urge the police to prevent antisocial individuals
while simultaneously limiting the flagrant abuse of authority. I am confident that the Indian
society can abandon such unconstitutional and inhumane ideas and place complete faith in
the rule of law.