In a dramatic turn of events, a prime suspect in the murder of former Tamil Nadu BSP chief, K Armstrong, was shot dead by the Chennai police early this morning. The suspect, known as ‘Seizing’ Raja, had been apprehended in Andhra Pradesh just a day prior to the incident. His death marks the third police encounter in Chennai since July.
The fatal encounter occurred near Neelangarai on the East Coast Road.
This incident follows the deaths of two other individuals linked to the murder case. Thiruvengadam, another suspect, and Kakkathopu Balaji, a well-known criminal, were also killed in recent police encounters. In both cases, authorities stated that officers were forced to fire in self-defense, raising further scrutiny.
Growing Concerns Over Police Encounters
The rise in encounter killings in Chennai has sparked outrage among human rights groups. Activists have condemned the actions of the police, accusing them of engaging in “extrajudicial killings.” Henri Tiphagne, Founder and Executive Director of People’s Watch, voiced strong criticism of the police’s handling of these incidents. “The judiciary should take this up suo moto. The state Human Rights Commission and state legal services too have an equal responsibility,” Tiphagne stated.
Critics are also concerned about the leadership under the new police commissioner, Ravi, claiming that officers have become “trigger-happy.” Activists warn that such incidents create a climate of fear, where citizens may feel unsafe as each encounter killing is seemingly justified without proper investigation.
Calls for Accountability
As public scrutiny intensifies, calls for greater oversight in police operations are growing louder. Rights groups are urging the state government to hold thorough inquiries into the recent encounters and ensure that law enforcement operates within the bounds of the law. The recurring pattern of fatal police actions has ignited debates about the balance between crime control and upholding civil liberties in Chennai.
While the police maintain that the encounters were necessary for self-defense, human rights advocates continue to question the frequency and legitimacy of these incidents, calling for transparency and judicial intervention.
