Why the Supreme Court is probing 171 encounters on Himanta Biswa Sarma’s watch

On October 22, the Supreme Court of India raised serious concerns over the alarming rise in police encounters in Assam, ordering the state government to provide detailed information on 171 such incidents that occurred between May 2021 and August 2022. The apex court’s directive follows a plea challenging the Gauhati High Court’s decision to dismiss a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) raising the issue. Describing the matter as “very serious”, the Supreme Court emphasised the need for transparency and accountability, asserting that such cases could not be casually dismissed.
The plea was filed by advocate Arif Md Yeasin Jwadder, who highlighted a disturbing pattern of alleged “fake encounters” claiming the Assam Police did not follow the Supreme Court’s 2014 guidelines on investigating police encounters. According to Jwadder, over 80 encounters resulted in 28 deaths and 48 injuries since May 2021, when Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma took office.
Sarma’s administration has touted a “zero tolerance” stance against crime, and police actions have visibly intensified. Data reveal a spike in encounters, which, according to the Assam government’s affidavit, involved 171 incidents where 56 people were killed, including four in custody, and 145 were injured. In contrast, only 62 such cases— a little more than one-third of 171—were registered in Assam between 2016 and 2021.
Two notable incidents in the past two years illustrate the ongoing trend. In August this year, an accused in a gang-rape case in Nagaon district drowned while allegedly trying to escape from police custody. The accused had been taken to the crime scene when he reportedly jumped into a pond. Earlier, in December 2023, the police shot dead Dipjyoti Neog, Manuj Buragohain and Biswanath Borgohain, who were accused of links with the banned United Liberation Front of Asom-Independent (ULFA-I). Initially the police said the trio in their custody snatched a pistol from an officer and were killed while trying to flee, but nine months later, in September, a first information report (FIR) was lodged against four officers alleging the encounter had been staged.
Chief Minister Sarma has consistently defended the Assam Police and suggested that criminals who do not wish to face encounters should surrender. He projects these actions as a strict measure against lawlessness that aligns with his administration’s broader goal of curbing crime. Sarma’s stance has earned him political capital as it resonates with a section of the population that sees stringent law enforcement as necessary for maintaining order.
However, opposition parties have sharply criticised this approach, accusing the government of bypassing due process. Allegations of “fake encounters” or extrajudicial killings have surfaced, with critics claiming that police actions under Sarma’s leadership are more about delivering instant justice than following the rule of law.
Many also claim that these encounters have a communal dimension as many of the victims are Muslims. Such accusations have heightened communal tension and raised concerns about the misuse of power to consolidate political support. Besides, this approach not only reinforces stereotypes but also diverts attention from much-needed reforms in the criminal justice system. By focusing on encounters as a method of control, systemic issues like police training, accountability and judicial oversight are sidelined, allowing for a dangerous normalisation of extrajudicial measures.
During the hearings, the Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, highlighted the need for a thorough investigation into each incident. Pointing out that the rising number of encounters was a matter of grave concern, the bench emphasised that human rights commissions must be proactive in addressing civil liberties issues. The court also noted that Assam’s troubled past and complex geographical landscape necessitate adherence to legal mandates to ensure that justice is both done and seen to be done.
The Supreme Court’s intervention comes at a crucial juncture for Assam, where law enforcement practices have come under intense scrutiny. While the state government defends its actions as necessary for crime control, the apex court’s insistence on transparency signals a critical need for checks and balances. The unfolding case underscores a broader debate on the limits of police power, the rule of law and the responsibility of the state to uphold civil liberties without discrimination. As the court continues to demand accountability, questions must also be raised on the need to improve the criminal justice system to ensure swift delivery of justice without resorting to alleged “populist” or extra-constitutional actions.
Subscribe to India Today Magazine