The State cannot substitute due process with punitive policing, even in the pursuit of effective crime control. Examine in the context of the increasing use of 'half-encounters' by

Introduction

The rule of law requires that criminal justice be administered through due process, fair investigation, and judicial adjudication. In recent years, concerns have emerged over the increasing use of so-called "half-encounters"—instances where accused persons are deliberately injured, often through gunshots to the leg, during police operations. While projected as a deterrent against crime, such practices raise serious constitutional, legal, and human rights concerns.

Why 'Half-Encounters' Raise Concerns

1. Violation of Due Process and Rule of Law

• Criminal liability must be determined by courts, not by law enforcement agencies.
• Punitive policing bypasses established legal procedures and undermines the justice system.

2. Threat to Fundamental Rights

• Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.
• Physical harm inflicted without judicial sanction violates constitutional protections.

3. Erosion of Presumption of Innocence

• Individuals remain innocent until proven guilty.
• "Half-encounters" effectively impose punishment before conviction.

4. Risk of Abuse and Arbitrary State Power

• Lack of accountability may encourage misuse against vulnerable groups, political opponents, or innocent persons.
• Creates scope for custodial violence and human rights violations.

5. Weakening Public Trust in Institutions

• Reliance on extra-legal methods signals failure of investigation, prosecution, and judicial processes.
• May reduce confidence in democratic institutions.

Arguments Advanced in Support

• Perceived as a quick response to rising crime and organized criminal networks.
• Claimed to have a deterrent effect where conviction rates are low.
• Often receives public support due to frustration with delays in the justice system.

However

• Short-term gains cannot justify departures from constitutional norms.
• Sustainable crime control depends on institutional effectiveness, not extra-judicial practices.

Measures for Effective Crime Control within Constitutional Limits

1. Strengthening Investigation and Prosecution

• Improve forensic capabilities, evidence collection, and witness protection.
• Enhance conviction rates through professional policing.

2. Police Reforms

• Implement recommendations of the National Police Commission and Prakash Singh reforms.
• Ensure operational autonomy coupled with accountability.

3. Judicial and Procedural Reforms

• Fast-track trials in serious criminal cases.
• Reduce pendency through technology and judicial capacity enhancement.

4. Independent Oversight Mechanisms

• Strengthen human rights commissions, police complaints authorities, and judicial oversight.

Value Addition

Constitutional Provisions

• Article 14: Equality before law.
• Article 21: Protection of life and personal liberty.
• Article 22: Safeguards against arbitrary arrest and detention.

Supreme Court Judgments

• Prakash Kadam v. Ramprasad Vishwanath Gupta (2011): Fake encounters are nothing but cold-blooded murders.
• PUCL v. State of Maharashtra (2014): Laid down detailed guidelines for investigation of police encounter deaths.
• D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997): Established safeguards against custodial abuse.

Committee Recommendation

• Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) emphasized accountable and citizen-centric policing under the rule of law.

Conclusion

The legitimacy of a democratic State rests not merely on controlling crime but on doing so within the framework of the Constitution and the rule of law. "Half-encounters" may appear to offer immediate results, but they risk normalizing extra-judicial punishment and weakening public institutions. Effective crime control must be achieved through professional policing, judicial efficiency, and constitutional due process, for the rule of law is strongest when it protects even those accused of violating it.