Vikas Dubey encounter: Mumbai lawyer moves SC, seeks judicial probe into the incident

The encounter is in violation of Dubey's fundamental rights, says the complainant

vikas_dubey_final Police officials at Kanpur; inset: Vikas Dubey | Pawan Kumar

A written complaint has been submitted to the Supreme Court of India for protection of the fundamental rights of Vikas Dubey, the gangster who was killed on early Friday morning in an encounter.

Filed by Mumbai-based advocate Atal Bihari Dubey, it reads that they were apprehensive that Vikas Dubey would be killed in the same way as the other accused in the Kanpur police murder case, and that the police has violated guidelines issued by the court in PUSL Vs State of Maharashtra matter.

Among the points raised by the petitioner to question the encounter are: the self-identification of Dubey at the Ujjain temple following which he was arrested; his statement to the police that he and his team had killed eight 8 police officers and had planned to burn their bodies; the police team’s forcible stopping of the media following the convoy that was getting Dubey to Kanpur from Ujjain; the police choosing to shoot Dubey in the chest and not his legs to prevent him from fleeing, and the inability of members of an elite force to capture him alive.

The advocate has asked for a judicial probe into the killing.

"Humble request to this Hon’ble court to direct CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) to register an FIR against all the police personal under section 302 and other sections and other responsible person who involved in this incident (sic)" reads the complaint.

It further requests the apex court to "take suo moto cognisance of the so-called encounter of Vikas Dubey which is violation of his fundamental rights and request the entire investigation to be transferred to the CBI".

In a recorded statement issued to the media, the lawyer said: “Article 12 of the Constitution guarantees the right to live with dignity to the people of India. It is not permissible for police personnel to play judge. Is the satisfying of collective conscience in such a brazenly unlawful and murderous way healthy for democracy? I am confident that the Supreme Court will take cognisance of my complaint”.