Vikas Dubey was a commonly heard name in Uttar Pradesh, India, where the gangster turned politician became an increasingly notorious figure over the years. Since the 1990s he had accumulated a whopping 60 criminal cases to his record. More recently on July 3rd, he was accused of killing 8 police officers in an attempt to escape being arrested. This ensued into a 6 day, large scale manhunt for Dubey; 50 state police teams were on the lookout, state borders were sealed and deeper investigations into his extensive political networks made the headlines.
Finally, on July 9th, Dubey was captured at the Mahakaal temple, in Madhya Pradesh. While the country collectively sighed in relief, reassured by the fact that Dubey would now face the legal consequences for years of terror. But the peace was short lived. The very next day after his arrest, Dubey was killed by the police. Shot when he attempted to flee. The overwhelmingly contradictory police accounts of the incident, paired with the deja-vous aspect of previous cases, has caused a nationwide uproar on the workings of the police. Indians everywhere are questioning the nature of the incident.
To understand just how controversial this encounter was, we’ll start by briefly recapping the events leading up to the shooting of Vikas Dubey.
Dubey was arrested at the temple on Thursday July 9th, where he shouted out his name for everyone around to hear, in a presumed act of surrender. The next day a police team chartered a flight to Madhya Pradesh to arrest the gangster, but decided to travel back to Uttar Pradesh with the gangster in a car. The national attention on this case meant that journalists and media tailed the police car on its way to Uttar Pradesh, until they were stopped by the authorities two kilometers ahead of the site where Dubey would be shot down.
Police say that Dubey attempted to snatch their guns and injured them in an attempt to escape, which resulted in the police shooting him in an act of self defence. Before we talk about the many questionable details of this incident, it should be noted that Dubey's aides, who were arrested earlier, were also killed similarly, while in police custody. Even more suspicious is the fact that a lawyer petitioned the court to offer protection to Dubey, claiming that the gangster would be killed in a “fake police encounter“, thereby foretelling the incident before it would occur.
Dubey’s prolonged criminal reign and police neglect aside, I will highlight 3 primary issues raised by this encounter, no matter which way you choose to spin the details or how naively you interpret the police accounts. I’ll address these issues one at a time, from the least worrying to the most deep rooted problem.
First let's look at the police account that Dubey did indeed try to escape while in police custody. Even if we were to accept this, it still calls into question the state of policing in India that allowed for such an incident to occur multiple times in the same week. Why was such a high profile criminal transported in a car when a chartered flight was at the ready? Why were police sitting in the back of the car with Dubey? Why was Dubey not handcuffed for the duration of the journey? These underlying questions of how law enforcement is misused the unreformed cycle of police mishaps that have proven to cause issues over the years.
Next, we’ll examine the more blatant details that suggest that the police faked the encounter and executed Dubey. The evidence that suggests this includes the fact that journalists were stopped beforehand, presumably to eliminate witnesses, and that 2 other gangsters were killed under the same circumstances earlier in the week. This scenario raises the doubt: Why did police choose to kill Dubey rather than let him face legal action? The answer could lie in the fact that police shot the gangster down to avoid the long drawn formal trial in India. The judiciary system in our country is unfortunately inefficient and police may have considered killing him a way to ensure justice was served. This highlights the slow and tedious Indian legal process that has reduced police faith in the court, and the changes that need to be made to ensure quicker criminal trials. But perhaps more controversially, it scrutinizes the level of autonomy the police force seems to have, to the extent where they feel that they can take justice into their own hands. Killing a criminal before trial is unconstitutional and bestows far too much power in the hands of the police who believe that they can override the law.
Lastly, and the most disquieting perspective of this incident lies in the police and politician nexus. The theory held by many is that Dubey’s political links ordered the police to assassinate him to avoid a court trial that would incriminate them as well. As bizarre or unlikely as this may seem to a skeptic, the evidence for the same is stirring. For instance, Dubey had previously escaped over 60 cases held against him using his political contacts, he had been photographed with numerous state officials over the years, and several sources have admitted that he performed numerous ‘tasks’ for political figures. This notion, that the people voted into power have such a strong influence over freedom of information in this country that they can influence the course of legal proceedings is alarming. It forces us to open our eyes to the corruption of the authorities as they manipulate information to alter the narrative presented to the unsuspecting public, thereby retaining their power.
All three issues, the last more than the first, shake the very grounds of democracy and rights that our country was supposed to be founded on. The systemically unequal distribution of power in India has never stared us in the face quite so blatantly, and it is time we call for reforms to this corrupted system.