HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court on Wednesday expressed its displeasure over the state government repeatedly seeking adjournments to submit its contentions over the alleged police encounter of the accused in the Disha rape case.
However, the court gave a final adjournment, to April 12, to submit the arguments in virtual mode or physical mode.
The division bench of the High Court of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N. Tukaramji — inquiring into the encounter based on the report of a Supreme Court-appointed fact-finding commission — observed that the state government’s attitude “looks like avoiding to come before and escaping”.
On a contention from the state that a senior advocate from the Supreme Court to argue on its behalf was tied up, the bench asked “why the ammunition from Delhi?”, saying that the Advocate General of the state government was present.
The state government had requested the court to adjourn the case at the last two hearings as well.
The bench was hearing a batch of petitions and PILs requesting judicial intervention into the encounter that took place on December 6, 2019, at Chatanpally village of Shadnagar mandal in Mahbubnagar district.
Four accused, charged with the gang rape and murder of a woman on November 27, 2019, were shot dead, while they were trying to escape, as per the police version.
After the authenticity of the encounter was widely questioned, besides being celebrated by a majority of the people, the case went to the Supreme Court, which appointed a commission and reverted it to the Telangana High Court along with the report.
While the High Court has finished hearing all sides, only the state government is yet to put forward its submissions.
Meanwhile, the investigation office handling the Disha rape and murder case filed an interlocutory petition in the High Court, challenging the report filed by the Supreme Court-appointed committee.
The report suggested that the police officers staged the encounter and called for them to be booked for murder.
Senior counsel P. Sriraghuram, representing the investigating officer, argued that a murder case against the officer would violate his Constitutional Right to Life.
“Generally, citizens come to the High Court when their Right to Life, prescribed under Article 21, is in danger. But, if the High Court orders the same based on the report of the commission, where shall the police officers go?” the counsel submitted.
Senior counsel Kondam Vivek Reddy, representing Disha’s father, citing a judgment issued by a five-judge bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in 2012, said that appropriate procedure must be followed in police killing incidents before considering the report.
However, Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan questioned the interlocutory application filed by the rape victim’s father in the alleged encounter and questioned his counsel whether he was in support of the accused being killed.
“We should allow a system of due process of law,” Bhuyan said.
Bhuyan also made it clear that the endeavour of the Supreme Court in the incident is the pursuit of the truth.
