Source:-https:\/\/thewire.in<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Lucknow: The three-member high-level judicial commission headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice B.S. Chauhan is likely to take a few more months to complete its probe into the police \u2018encounter\u2019 in which Kanpur gangster Vikas Dubey was killed about five months ago under suspicious circumstances.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The commission of inquiry was set up by the apex court on July 22, in view of the serious controversies that arose over the manner in which the alleged encounter took place on July 10. The court\u2019s order said the inquiry was to be completed over a two months, more four months later, little headway has been made.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to Justice Chauhan, the commission has already sought an extension, on the plea that such inquiries always involve long procedures. \u201cWe started the inquiry once the commission\u2019s office was set up in Lucknow; we visited different places including Vikas Dubey\u2019s village where he had gunned down eight policemen, as well as the place where he was killed in the encounter. Currently, evidence of policemen and government officials is being recorded; and once that is done, we will invite the other parties to record their evidence, following which lawyers of the two sides will put across their respective arguments,\u201d he told The Wire over telephone from Noida, where he lives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe report will be prepared only after this whole exercise is accomplished,\u201d he said while adding, \u201cI have also been a bit unwell for some time.\u201d Asked how much more time the commission will need to complete its task, he said, \u201cI cannot say that right away.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Some delay was caused on account of the initial controversy over the credentials of each of the three members. A petition was moved by a Mumbai-based lawyer, Ghanshyam Upadhyay, before the highest court against the appointment of Justice Chauhan as head of the commission. Upadhyay had argued that Justice Chauhan\u2019s younger brother, Virendra Singh, was a Bharatiya Janata Party MLC and is known to be a frontrunner for a berth in the UP council of ministers whenever the next expansion takes place. In addition, Justice Chauhan\u2019s daughter is married to a BJP MP\u2019s son.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, the Supreme Court not only dismissed the petition but also castigated Upadhyay for raising all objections against Justice Chauhan\u2019s appointment. \u201cThere are judges whose father or brother or relatives are MPs. Are you (petitioner) saying that they all are biased judges? If any relative is belonging to a political party, is this an illegal act?\u201d the apex court had told the lawyer petitioner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The top court had earlier already dismissed a separate plea seeking the removal of two other members of the inquiry commission, saying that it would not allow the petitioner to cast aspersions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The other two members of the judicial commission are former UP director general of police K.L. Gupta and retired Allahabad high court judge Justice S.K. Agarwal. Interestingly, the names of each of the three members were proposed by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta in consultation with the UP government, which was clearly the interested party. Gupta\u2019s strong BJP nexus was an open secret and he headed the UP Police during the Kalyan Singh regime. His close relative, Mohit Agarwal, was Inspector General of Police of the Kanpur zone and his role in the encounters was bound to come under question.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Agarwal had resigned after he was transferred from Allahabad to the Jharkhand high court. He was practicing in the Uttarakhand high court when he was handpicked for the judicial panel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It may be pertinent to mention here that the Vikas Dubey encounter was not the only case in which the originally prescribed timeframe for a judicial probe has been stretched. Past experience says that judicial commissions usually seek repeated extensions to fulfil their tasks. And more often than not, reports of such commissions come so late in the day that popular interest in the issue has faded away.<\/p>\n