In West Bengal and beyond, kill the encounter — it undermines the rule of law

Unfortunately, the incidents in Bengal are not isolated aberrations. By all accounts, they are part of a wider national pattern of the police taking the law into their own hands.

Courts have repeatedly sought to draw important distinctions, but their interventions have done little to arrest the larger pattern.

3 min readNov 11, 2026 06:00 AM IST First published on: Nov 11, 2026 at 06:00 AM IST

The killing in a police encounter of a man accused of raping and murdering a minor girl in West Bengal’s Uttar Dinajpur, the fourth such incident in the state since the BJP came to power in May, points to a disquieting possibility. The “encounter” is becoming routine in the state. Bengal has a long and troubled history of political violence. But the frequency of the incidents, and Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari’s public defence of a “free hand” to the the police, particularly in cases of sexual violence, raise questions about the troubling short-circuiting of due process in a climate of impunity.

Unfortunately, the incidents in Bengal are not isolated aberrations. By all accounts, they are part of a wider national pattern of the police taking the law into their own hands. Earlier this month, in Andhra Pradesh’s Anantapur, a 21-year-old accused of attacking a schoolgirl with a chainsaw was shot by the police and subsequently had to have his leg amputated. The incident revived memories of the 2019 Hyderabad rape-murder case, in which the four accused were killed in an alleged encounter. In Uttar Pradesh, official statistics recorded 17,043 police encounter operations between March 2017 and May 2026. An investigation by this paper earlier this year found that the Punjab Police reported 34 encounters between November 2025 and January 2026 — more than one every three days. There is a fundamental distinction between enabling the police to act decisively within the law and endorsing a culture of retribution. The promise of instant justice can command public approval, when leaders present it as evidence of resolve against crime. But the less visible processes of investigation, prosecution and trial are indispensable to the rule of law. Political capital gained from displays of toughness comes at the cost of institutional credibility. It creates a cycle of weakening accountability that shrinks citizens’ freedoms.

Courts have repeatedly sought to draw important distinctions, but their interventions have done little to arrest the larger pattern. In its 2014 judgment in People’s Union for Civil Liberties v State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court laid down safeguards for investigating police encounters resulting in death — including mandatory registration of an FIR, an independent investigation and a magisterial inquiry. In May 2025, in Arif Md Yeasin Jwadder v State of Assam, the Court reaffirmed that these safeguards were binding and could not be made contingent on the victim or the family initiating proceedings. Such judicial directives are essential, but their efficacy ultimately depends on institutional compliance. The legitimacy of the criminal justice system rests not on the speed or spectacle of punishment, but on the certainty, fairness and credibility of due process. No government can afford to lose sight of that.