From acid attacks to rape-murder: Andhra, Telangana’s history of ‘encounters’ in crimes against women

The 21-year-old man was arrested after allegedly entering a school in Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh, and attacking a student with a chainsaw. The incident happened last Saturday and caused widespread condemnation. Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu ordered police to find the attacker and seek the harshest legal punishment swiftly.

By Tuesday, the man’s injured leg had developed gangrene. Doctors at a hospital then amputated the leg. The article does not report that he was convicted or sentenced by a court. It describes him as allegedly involved in the attack, preserving the distinction between accusation and proven guilt.

The case has also revived debate about police action against suspects accused of crimes against women. Andhra Pradesh has seen earlier alleged encounters, including the 2008 Warangal acid-attack case and the 2019 Hyderabad rape-murder case. Those cases drew public celebrations but also serious questions about due process and independent investigation.

An alleged police encounter is a death caused by police during an operation, with officers claiming that suspects attacked them or tried to escape. The phrase “alleged” matters because the official account may later be challenged. The article describes encounters involving suspects accused of serious crimes against women.

A lawful conviction requires a court to examine evidence, hear the prosecution and defence, and decide guilt. If guilt is established, the court determines punishment under law. In an encounter, police officers themselves use lethal force before a trial has established guilt. That makes independent scrutiny especially important.

The 2019 Hyderabad case shows the difference clearly. Police said four suspects attacked officers while recreating the crime scene and were killed in self-defence. The Sirpurkar Commission later rejected that account, saying the men were deliberately shot with the intention of causing their deaths. It recommended action against 10 officers.

The article identifies at least two earlier instances of alleged extrajudicial justice in Andhra Pradesh over the last 18 years. Both involved suspects accused of crimes against women. The cases were separated by 11 years and occurred in the period from 2008 to 2019.

In December 2008, Warangal Police shot dead three men accused of throwing acid at two engineering students. In December 2019, Cyberabad Police shot dead four people arrested for the rape and murder of a veterinary doctor. Police gave different operational accounts, but both episodes were described as encounters rather than court punishments.

The recent Anantapur school attack prompted the comparison, although the article reports a leg amputation rather than a police killing in that case. It says public celebrations followed the earlier shootings, while questions about staged encounters and due process persisted. The 2019 case led to an independent Supreme Court-ordered probe.

For the 2008 Warangal case, police said the three suspects had tried to attack officers with a country-made revolver and knives. They also allegedly attempted to escape. Police said the shooting occurred in a wooded area where the suspects had allegedly hidden the motorcycle used in the acid attack.

The suspects were S Srinivas, B Sanjay and P Hari Krishna. They had been arrested after allegedly throwing acid at an engineering student whom Srinivas was stalking. The student and her friend were later killed. Police presented the shooting as a response to an armed attack and attempted escape.

For the 2019 Hyderabad case, police said four accused men attacked officers while being taken to recreate the rape-murder at an under-construction bridge near Chattapally. Officers said they fired in self-defence. The four were Mohammed Arif, J Naveen, J Shiva and C Chennakeshavulu. The later commission rejected this explanation.

The Justice V S Sirpurkar Commission investigated the December 2019 deaths after the Supreme Court ordered an independent probe. Police had said the four suspects attacked officers during a crime-scene reconstruction near Chattapally. The officers claimed they shot the men in self-defence.

In its report submitted to the Supreme Court in May 2022, the Commission rejected that version. It said the accused were deliberately fired upon with the intention of causing their deaths. It also said the police team had not been attacked, contradicting the central explanation for the shooting.

The Commission recommended action against 10 police officers who had accompanied the four suspects to the crime scene. Its findings changed the case from a celebrated account of swift police action into a major due-process controversy. They also showed why independent investigations matter when police killings are disputed.

When police killings are celebrated as instant justice, public approval can overshadow questions about evidence, procedure, and accountability. A suspect may be treated as unquestionably guilty even though no court has tested the case. This can weaken trust in legal institutions and make later scrutiny harder.

The 2019 Hyderabad encounter shows this tension. Thousands gathered near the site and showered flower petals on police officials after the four suspects were killed. Police said the men had attacked officers during a crime-scene reconstruction. The celebration treated the official version as sufficient before an independent investigation had examined it.

The Supreme Court later ordered a probe. The Sirpurkar Commission found that the suspects had been deliberately shot to cause their deaths and rejected the claim that police had been attacked. It recommended action against 10 officers. The case demonstrates why public anger must not replace investigation, trial, or accountability.

Due process matters because accusations are not the same as proven guilt. A court gives both sides a chance to present evidence and tests whether the prosecution’s case is reliable. The presumption of innocence prevents public anger or suspicion from becoming punishment before that process is complete.

The separation of roles is equally important. Police investigate and gather evidence, while courts independently decide guilt and punishment. If police can kill suspects and call the act justice, they become investigator, accuser, judge, and executioner. The 2019 Commission finding shows why the police version must be open to challenge.

These safeguards matter even after brutal allegations because the law must work consistently. In Hyderabad, public celebrations followed the deaths, but an independent probe later rejected the claim that officers had been attacked. The article therefore presents due process as a protection against wrongful killings and unchecked state power.