MALAKAR, WHY DID YOU ORDER SHOOTING OF THAT YOUTH: SHRIKANT PRATYUSH ?

MALAKAR, WHY DID YOU ORDER SHOOTING OF THAT YOUTH: SHRIKANT PRATYUSH ?

20-JUNE-ENG 1

RAJIV NAYAN AGRAWAL

ARA------------------------The situation has taken a serious turn following the death of Bharat Bhushan Tiwari—a resident of Bilauti village in the Shahpur police station area of ​​Bhojpur district—during a police encounter. Questions are being raised about the entire sequence of events, and there is deep public dissatisfaction regarding the police's role. When journalist Shrikant Pratyush visited the Shahpur police station to get to the bottom of the matter and posed pointed questions to the then-SHO Rajesh Malakar, an exchange ensued that raised several doubts about the police action: could this have been avoided?

Journalist Shrikant Pratyush went to the Shahpur police station looking for the suspended SHO, Rajesh Malakar. Initially, he could not be found, but later, spotting him heading towards the station gate, the journalist followed him and, while running alongside, asked directly: "Mr. Malakar, why did you order the shooting of that young man? Who exactly gave the order to shoot him?" The SHO remained extremely defensive in his response. He refused to give a statement, claiming he lacked the authority to do so; the journalist countered by asking whether the police actually have the right to shoot anyone. It was a clear case of self-defense: Rajesh Malakar

Suspended Station House Officer (SHO) Rajesh Malakar argued in his defense that the police made every possible effort to save the individual until the very last moment. He claimed that the young man possessed a pistol and fired approximately ten to fifteen rounds at the police force. According to the SHO, the police exercised restraint and tried to reason with him for a considerable time. Retaliatory action was taken in self-defense only when the situation spiraled out of control and the lives of police personnel were in imminent danger. He clarified that there was no premeditated intent to shoot; rather, it was entirely a case of self-defense.

However, the matter is not as straightforward as the police administration portrays it. Bharat Bhushan Tiwari’s family alleges that they had previously informed the police station about his mental instability. They claim they had approached the police with this concern but were kept waiting at the station while, simultaneously, the police shot him. In response, Malakar argued that the family is now leveling false allegations against the police, whereas until the previous day, they—along with other neighborhood residents—had been cursing the man and demanding police action against him. He noted that people's perspectives shift over time, and they have now turned against the police.

The family alleges that he was shot ruthlessly, noting wounds on vital parts of his body. Conversely, the police claim that he was immediately rushed to the hospital and provided with every possible medical facility, including arrangements for treatment in Patna. While the police argue that firing was necessary for self-defense, the question of whether the situation was truly grave enough to warrant taking a life remains a matter for investigation.

Many political leaders, villagers, and family members firmly believe that this was not an encounter but a premeditated killing. Villagers state that the manner in which the police handled the entire incident casts doubt on their intentions. On one hand, the police argument—"If someone were to shoot at you, would you simply sit back?"—cannot be entirely dismissed; yet, the ethical questions surrounding the incident of a person falling victim to police gunfire remain equally valid.

The case involving Bharat Bhushan Tiwari, a resident of Bilauti village, remains unresolved. The truth of the matter and the propriety of the police's actions will only become clear after an impartial investigation. On one side stands the uniform representing the rule of law; on the other, the grief and outrage of a family mourning the death of a young man. This incident has once again raised questions regarding the operational style of the Bihar police administration and its methods of handling tense situations. Was this genuinely a case of self-defense, or was it a lapse that could have been avoided? This is the question to which the victim's family—and society at large—is seeking an answer.