New Delhi: The three-member judicial commission which was set up to probe the killing of gangster Vikas Dubey in July last year has given a ‘clean chit’ to the encounter which killed him, but concluded there was enough evidence to show that the gangster was patronised by local police, revenue and administrative officials.
While the report had been submitted to the government in April this year, the Uttar Pradesh government tabled the report in the assembly on Thursday. The three-member commission is headed by former Supreme Court judge B.S. Chauhan and has as its members former Allahabad high court judge Sashi Kant Agrawal and former UP director general of police K.L. Gupta.
Dubey was killed on July 10 last year in an ‘encounter’. A week before, he and members of his gang had ambushed a police team which was on its way to arrest Dubey. Eight policemen were killed in the ambush. In subsequent days, the Uttar Pradesh police killed five associates of Dubey in three different encounters.
Dubey was arrested in Ujjain and handed over to the UP police. He was killed in an encounter on July 10. The police claimed that the car in which Dubey was in transit had overturned, following which the gangster seized a gun from a policeman and tried to flee. He also fired at the police team, which returned fire in self-defence, the police said.
According to the Indian Express, the probe panel’s report says that police and revenue officers “patronised” Dubey and his gang. “If any person lodged any complaint against Vikas Dubey or his associates, the complainant was always humiliated by the police. Even if the higher authorities directed to lodge the complaint, the local police dictated the terms,” the report says. According to the newspaper, the panel pointed to the fact that Dubey’s wife was elected to the Zila Panchayat as a member and his brother’s wife was elected as pradhan of the village – despite the fact that several FIRs were registered against the gangster – as evidence of Dubey’s clout in the local administration.
“Investigation in any case lodged against them was never impartial. Sections relating to serious offences were dropped before filing the chargesheet. During the trial, most witnesses turn hostile. Vikas Dubey and his associates got bail orders from the courts easily and quickly as there was no serious opposition by the state authorities and government advocates. State authorities never considered it appropriate to engage a special counsel for his prosecution. The state never moved any application for cancellation of bail or approached the superior court for cancellation of any of the bail orders,” the report said.
The report adds that Dubey was tipped off about the police team that was on its way to arrest on July 3. It says “some of the police personnel posted in Chaubeypur police station, which has jurisdiction over Dubey’s Bikru village” had him off. The commission said:
“There was a total failure of the intelligence unit in Kanpur in collecting information about the criminal activities [of Dubey] and possession of sophisticated weapons. No proper caution was taken in preparation for the raid, and none of the policemen were wearing bulletproof jackets. Only 18 of them had arms, the rest had gone empty-handed or with sticks.”
The panel recommended disciplinary proceedings against “erring public servants” who colluded with Dubey for “loss of records, particularly the record of cases relating to Vikas Dubey, after holding a regular inquiry, and pass necessary orders against those found guilty.”
The report also gives a ‘clean chit’ to the encounters in which Dubey’s maternal uncle Prem Prakash, his aide Atul Dubey, Amar Dubey, Pravin Kumar Dubey and Prabhat Mishra, were killed. The probe panel said that the injuries sustained by the police officers who were involved in these encounters “did not appear to be self-inflicted” and that the injuries suffered by the accused “were on the non-vital parts of their bodies”.
The probe lists the series of events that resulted in Dubey’s killing on Kuly 10. It says that while the convoy was on its way back from Ujjain, a “herd of cows and buffaloes started crossing the road”, causing the vehicle to skid and turn over. The report said that the incident caused “momentary unconsciousness” to some of the police personnel sitting in the vehicle, according to the Indian Express. Dubey took “advantage of the situation” and snatched the revolver of a policeman and started running to his left along a kutchha road. The report says that Dubey shot and injured two policemen and that the police fired at Dubey in self-defence.
No witness questioned police version
The probe panel was formed after several PILs were filed in the Supreme Court, seeking a court-monitored probe into the encounter killings. The apex court had approved the Uttar Pradesh government’s decision to institute the inquiry commission on July 22, 2020.
At the time the report was submitted to the UP government in April this year, the panel lamented that witnesses did not come forward to challenge the police claim.
“We did our best to collect evidence, asking the public and media to give their version. The media carried so many stories against the UP police but none gave any evidence,” a member of the committee was quoted as saying. The report even accused the “non-participation by citizenry and media” of resulting in defeating the purpose of establishing the commission.
Dubey’s wife nor family members also did not provide any evidence to challenge the police’s claims.
There were, however, witnesses supporting the police version.