Bajrang Dal men didn’t open fire; inspector killed by police bullet, says BJP MLA

Lucknow, Jul 15: As many as 122 alleged criminals were killed in over 6,000 encounters in Uttar Pradesh in the past three years, while 13 policemen also lost their lives during this period, a senior police official said.

He also said over 2,000 criminals were injured in police action, while over 13,000 of them have been arrested.

"Thirteen policemen have been killed in action in as many as 6,126 encounters (in UP), while as many as 122 criminals have been gunned down," Additional Director General of Police (Law and Order) Prashant Kumar said while sharing details of police encounters from March 20, 2017, to July 10, 2020.

As many as 13,361 criminals have been arrested, while 2,296 criminals were injured in police encounters, he said, adding 909 policemen were also injured in these incidents.

Referring to the Kanpur ambush in which eight policemen were killed, Kumar said, "Of the 21 named accused in the incident, six have been killed and four arrested so far. A hunt is on to nab the 11 other accused."

Eight police personnel, including a DSP, were gunned down by the henchmen of gangster Vikas Dubey in Bikru village of Kanpur on July 3.

Seven others, including a civilian, were injured in the attack after the police team entered the village past July 2 midnight to arrest the gangster.

Dubey was later killed in an encounter on July 10 after police claimed that he tried to escape from the spot in the Bhauti area where the vehicle carrying him from Ujjain to Kanpur met with an accident.

Kumar said overall there has been a decline in the crime rate in the state this year compared to the last year.

"A total of 579 instances of loot took place in the state from January 1, 2020, to June 15, 2020. This is 44.17 per cent less compared to the crimes committed in the same period in 2019, the ADG (Law and Order) said.

He said 33 incidents of dacoity have been reported in the state this year so far. It is 37.74 per cent less compared to the crimes committed in the same period in 2019 .

Similarly, 2,604 instances of burglary have taken this year so far and is 30.97 per cent less compared to the crimes committed in the same period last year, Kumar added.

He said 1,019 dowry-related deaths have taken place this year, registering a 6.34 per cent decline compared to the previous year.

As many as 913 incidents of rape have been reported this year so far, a decline of 25.41 per cent compared to the last year, Kumar said.

Jun 9: Prime Minister Narendra Modi wants all 1.3 billion Indians to be “vocal for local” — meaning, to not just use domestically made products but also to promote them. As an overseas citizen living in Hong Kong, I’m doing my bit by very vocally demanding Indian mangoes on every trip to the grocery. But half the summer is gone, and not a single slice so far.

My loss is due to India’s COVID-19 lockdown, which has severely pinched logistics, a perennial challenge in the huge, infrastructure-starved country. But more worrying than the disruption is the fruity political response to it. Rather than being a wake-up call for fixing supply chains, the pandemic seems to be putting India on an isolationist course. Why?

Granted that the liberal view that trade is good and autarky bad isn’t exactly fashionable anywhere right now. What makes India’s lurch troublesome is that the pace and direction of economic nationalism may be set by domestic business interests. The Indian liberals, many of whom are Western-trained academics, authors and — at least until a few years ago — policy makers, want a more competitive economy. They will be powerless to prevent the slide.

Modi’s call for a self-reliant India has been echoed by Home Minister Amit Shah, the cabinet’s unofficial No. 2, in a television interview. If Indians don’t buy foreign-made goods, the economy will see a jump, he said. The strategy — although it’s too nebulous yet to call it that — has a geopolitical element. A military standoff with China is under way, apparently triggered by India’s completion of a road and bridge near the common border in the tense Himalayan region of Ladakh. It’s very expensive to fight even a limited war there. With India’s economy flattened by COVID, New Delhi may be looking for ways to restore the status quo and send Beijing a signal.

Economic boycotts, such as Chinese consumers’ rejection of Japanese goods over territorial disputes in the East China Sea, are well understood as statecraft. In these times, it’s not even necessary to name an enemy. An undercurrent of popular anger against China, the source of both the virus and India’s biggest bilateral trade deficit, is supposed to do the job. But is it ever that easy?

A hastily introduced policy to stock only local goods in police and paramilitary canteens became a farcical exercise after the list of banned items ended up including products by the local units of Colgate-Palmolive Co., Nestle SA, and Unilever NV, which have had significant Indian operations for between 60 and 90 years, as well as Dabur India Ltd., a New Delhi-based maker of Ayurveda brands. The since-withdrawn list demonstrates the practical difficulty of bureaucrats trying to find things in a globalized world that are 100% indigenous.

Free-trade champions fret that the prime minister, whom they saw as being on their side six years ago, is acting against their advice to dismantle statist controls on land, labor and capital to help make the country more competitive. Engage with the world more, not less, they caution. But Modi also has to satisfy the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the umbrella Hindu organisation that gets him votes. Its backbone of small traders, builders and businessmen — the RSS admits only men — was losing patience with the anemic economy even before the pandemic. Now, they’re in deep trouble, because India’s broken financial system won’t deliver even state-guaranteed loans to them.

The U.S.-China tensions — over trade, intellectual property, COVID responsibility and Hong Kong’s autonomy — offer a perfect backdrop. A dire domestic economy and trouble at the border provide the foreground. Big business will dial economic nationalism up and down to hit a trifecta of goals: Block competition from the People's Republic; make Western rivals fall in line and do joint ventures; and tap deep overseas capital markets. The first goal is being achieved with newly placed restrictions on investment from any country that shares a land border with India. The second aim is to be realized by corporate lobbying to influence India's whimsical economic policies. As for the third objective, with the regulatory environment becoming tougher for U.S.-listed Chinese companies like Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., an opportunity may open up for Indian firms.

All this may bring India Shenzhen-style enclaves of manufacturing and trade, but it will concentrate economic power in fewer hands, something that worries liberals. They’re moved by the suffering of India’s low-wage workers, who have borne the brunt of the COVID shutdown. But when their vision of a more just society and fairer income distribution prompts them to make common cause with the ideological Left, they’re quickly repelled by the Marxist voodoo that all cash, property, bonds and real estate held by citizens or within the nation “must be treated as national resources available during this crisis.” Who will invest in a country that does that instead of just printing money?

At the same time, when liberals look to the business class, they see a sudden swelling of support for ideas like a universal basic income. They wonder if this isn’t a ploy by industry to outsource part of the cost of labor to the taxpayer. Slogans like Modi’s vocal-for-local stir the pot and thicken the confusion. The value-conscious Indian consumer couldn’t give two hoots for calls to buy Indian, but large firms will know how to exploit economic nationalism. One day soon, I’ll get my mangoes — from them.