ABUSING CM WON’T HELP! FORMER DGP QUESTIONS POLICE CONDUCT

ABUSING CM WON’T HELP! FORMER DGP QUESTIONS POLICE CONDUCT

21-JUNE-ENG 3

RAJIV NAYAN AGRAWAL

PATNA--------------------------The controversy surrounding the encounter of Bharat Bhushan Tiwari has not yet cooled down. Family members, Bihar BJP leaders, and others are raising questions about the incident. The working style of the Bihar Police is under scrutiny, and questions are being raised about the Samrat Chaudhary-led government. Amidst this, former Bihar DGP Gupteshwar Pandey has raised a significant point.

Patna: "My question is: was Bharat Bhushan Tiwari from Bilauti a criminal? Did he have a criminal background? Was he a thief, a dacoit, a robber, a murderer, a kidnapper, or an extortionist? Was he corrupt, a Naxalite, a traitor, or an anti-social element? What is the answer to this? He was none of these things. Instead, he was a passionate, spirited, and fearless warrior who became the voice of the local people, raising their issues before the administration and the government." This statement comes from Gupteshwar Pandey, the former Bihar DGP—a well-known IPS officer celebrated for his work in community policing. His remarks offer insight into the entire situation surrounding Bharat Tiwari's encounter. Pandey has pointed out that the incident reveals a lack of proper police training.

Currently dedicated to propagating Sanatan Dharma, former DGP Gupteshwar Pandey shared his views on the Bharat Bhushan Tiwari case during a live social media session. He remarked, "From what I have observed and understood, he was someone who raised issues concerning the displaced residents of Javaniya village. He was fighting for their cause and sought to convey their grievances to the administration and the government. While his method of protest may have been flawed, his objective was noble. He never made any personal demands—neither from the administration nor from the government."

Gupteshwar Pandey further added that he was simply raising demands with the administration and the government regarding the hardships ordinary people faced within the system. Abusing the system, abusing the police—is this such a grave crime that someone should be shot for it? I saw the press release issued by the district police administration—sent by a journalist from Ara. Even that release did not label him a major criminal; instead, it stated that he was mentally unstable. If he was mentally unstable, he must have been undergoing treatment somewhere, and the administration would have proof of that. Based on the social media clips I’ve seen, it appears he had become emotionally unbalanced due to frustration—what one might colloquially call 'unstable' or 'deranged.'

Gupteshwar Pandey continued, "But the question remains: why was he shot? I saw a pistol—or a revolver—in his hand; tell me, what kind of weapon is that? He had no gang or group with him, nor any sophisticated weaponry. He was alone with just one pistol. How many rounds did he have? How many were recovered from him? And what was the distance between him and the police personnel—who were equipped with sophisticated weapons and had surrounded him? I believe they were about two hundred meters away. What is the effective range of a pistol? Even if he were to fire from there—with the police standing two hundred or two hundred and fifty meters away—could that bullet actually harm them? Police personnel—who have undergone professional training—know very well that a pistol's effective range is only about thirty meters, certainly not more than that."

Pandey added, "So, the question arises: what was the threat? Even assuming there was a threat—he threw down his weapon and surrendered. He even said, 'There should be no foul play against me.' While the pistol was in his hand, there was indeed a danger—let's concede that point. You might have fired in self-defense; that could have been a valid excuse. But what about when he threw down his weapon and surrendered?" He had been disarmed; what kind of threat did he pose to the police? He was showered with bullets from state-of-the-art weapons. What is this? What about the right to private defense? Legal experts can speak to that. The question arises: who fired the shots after he had discarded his weapon? On whose orders was the firing done? Who was leading that team? All these individuals are guilty of murder.

He stated that, prima facie, this is not a case of a genuine police encounter. The various clips surfacing on social media make this clear: he was shot after he had thrown away his weapon. Therefore, this is a case of murder. You asked for my opinion; this is it. Arrests must be made. The investigation should be conducted under the supervision of a judge from the Honorable High Court, and there should be a speedy trial. All the guilty parties must be punished and dismissed from service through departmental action. There is no benefit in hurling abuses at the DGP or the Chief Minister. Custodial deaths occur at police stations; the DG and the Chief Minister cannot prevent them directly. The fault lies with police training. He was hurling abuses? Your ego was bruised? He was being troublesome? So, you shot him? You murdered him? This is a completely unlawful act. I condemn it. I demand that the government wipe away this stain and strive to ensure the strictest possible punishment for the guilty.