You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Miscellaneous

    Who gave cops the right to shoot someone?

    This is strange. An employee of " Apple" company was shot dead by a cop. The only fault of this person was that he didn't stop his car when they asked him to do.

    The incident took place in Lucknow while Vivek Tiwari was returning home from the office accompanied by a female employee. On the way, he was asked to stop the car by two policemen but he refused and tried to speed away. One of the constables shot him for this reason. He said he did this in self-defence. Vivek was taken to the hospital where he died.

    Now the question is who gave rights to the police to shoot people just for such a small reason. Don't you think he did wrong?

    Don't they have instructions when they have to shoot and when not?
  • #649498
    No, He must be right. Firstly, Why should a cop be provided with a gun? Is it for show? I think, it is to fire at a person who doesn't obey the police, or act against the police with their gun. I feel, the apple guy must have threatened the cop with his gun, and for self defence, the cop must have fired his gun or pistol. When the cop's life is in danger, should he contact someone to fire his gun?

    @ Why the guy did not stop his car when asked by the cop?

    No life without Sun

  • #649508
    Now a days police are seeing everyone with suspicion and particularly in UP the law and order situation has gone from bad to worse and police have been given sweeping powers to deal with persons. I find fault with both of them. Firstly every citizen are bound to follow the traffic rules and if the cops ask to stop the vehicle for checking, it must be obliged. Otherwise there would be suspicion and on that doubt the cops are authorized to take action. But shooting was never done previously . At the most the cops would chase or apprehend at other points by giving clues and feeds about the speeding car and not stopping. By the way the cops would have taken the number of the car and later sent a show cause notice to check the car. And especially during late night drunk and drive checking cops ask every car to stop and probably to avoid harassment Vivek Tiwari would have sped ?
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #649509
    I think Indian police must be eqipped with tasers. That would reduce mishaps like these. Tasers or tranquilizers will immobilize the criminal and make cases many times safer for both the police and the criminals. Shooting the criminals or even suspects down is inhumane no matter what the crime is. In Hyderabad a murder took place. It became infamous because police and the traffic police just watched as the murderer hacked a person in public with an axe. I wish the murderer was shot in that instant. But upholding law is not the ways of a good citizen. Police must be given with tranquilizing equipment in India.
    The stronger a light shines the darker are the shadows around it.

  • #649516
    There are laid down rules and procedures regarding the opening of fire by a person in uniform but circumstances in which he may not have the time to follow the procedure or when he has no other option but to open fire may arise during the execution of duty or a specific task and that need to be kept in mind.

    The Chief Minister of UP has already said that strict action will be taken against such rogues in uniform. The incident, as it appears, is a case of over-reaction on the part of the cop in question. The cop and the lady accompanying the victim has given different versions of the incident and therefore we will have to wait for the investigation reports to discuss the actual facts.

    All said and done, I think the general law and order situation in the State has a role to play in the whole episode.

    'Any fool can know. The point is to understand."- Albert Einstein

  • #649517
    Before the election of the present Government in UP, the state had become a den of criminals. The present Government has started clearing the mess. Many hoodlums have been killed and many have surrendered. In many cases, the UP Police have killed the criminals fleeing in speeding vehicles which didn't stop when challenged by the Police.

    In this case also, the executive didn't stop when asked by the Police. So, the Police fired at the executive. Nevertheless, it is a terrible mistake and the DG of the UP Police has sought an unconditional apology. The Government is going to take punitive action against those Police officials involved in the incident.

    Come on, have a fight. Don't shoot and scoot.

  • #649542
    Whenever such incidents take place the sympathy wave goes with the deceased. In these cases it is very difficult to find out whose fault it was as the deceased person is not there to tell the exact story.

    Policemen will narrate the things as per their perspective. It could be true or the distorted version of the things.

    Police is empowered to open fire on a running away vehicle or person just to create fear so that the culprit surrenders but in this case the person who was in the vehicle has taken the warning of police very casually thinking that why he should stop when he had not committed any crime.

    So this is a case of more and less like the mistaken identity.

    Knowledge is power.

  • #649548
    The first question comes to anyone's mind is why the person did not stop the vehicle? A man in uniform is aking somebody to stop the vehicle and he is the law enforcing person, why one should not stop for a while and see what is the problem. This is a mistake by the software guy who died.
    At the same time, there is a fault with the police also. He should not have fired at the man. As mentioned by others, until the investigation is completed, facts will not come out.
    The law and order situation in UP is not that good and the government is trying to bring back the peace. In that process, the police were given special powers. As such people should cooperate with them. Otherwise, it will be difficult for them also to maintain the situation. The person might have taken the instruction of police seriously and might have stopped the vehicle.
    In this particular case, we can't blame alone the police for the mishap. However, the government is taking the suitable action on the concerned and trying to punish the guilty.

    always confident

  • #649551
    According to the constable on duty, the executive was in the car along with a lady colleague. The car was parked and the light was off. When the police constable asked him to come out of the vehicle, he tried to flee running over the constable. So, the policemen fired.

    But it is only a version. The probe has been ordered. The actual truth will come out later. The on-duty staff involved in the incident have been suspended.

    Come on, have a fight. Don't shoot and scoot.

  • #649554
    The policemen were not in uniform.

    Would any of you stop the car, in the middle of the night, on a lonely stretch of road, if your co-passenger was a woman, and two motorbike-borne men hailed your car down? How would you tell that they were policemen?

    There are a lot of inconsistencies in the constable's statement. The eye-witnesses account is different from what the cops have mentioned in the FIR. There was a definite attempt to cover up. The ex-cop in his statement claimed that he shot the deceased in self-defence. Strange that he has no injuries to show that his life was in grave danger.

    A CCTV footage has emerged of both vehicles heading towards the police check-post, within minutes of each other, around the time of the shootout.

    The question is why is the police trigger happy? Who gave them the authority to shoot, without provocation?

    The two constables have been arrested and dismissed from service.

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

  • #649557
    A very good point raised by Mrs Juana which is missed by all. In the circumstances mentioned no one will stop his vehicle when accosted by two people in the middle of the night. I do not find any fault with the people travelling by car.
    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #649558
    Rightly said by Juana no one will stop a vehical at night on lonely Road. The question is why the policemen were not in uniform if they were on duty.

    If they were patrolling what made them think that they should should the person. And why one of the policeman said he did it in his self defence.


    " It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for what you are not" ... Andre Gide

  • #649561
    I wonder if the reactions and comments of members would have been as muted and decent had this incident taken place in another state? Given the history, some members would have been screaming bloody murder.

    Now people patiently wait for the outcome. I wish that they could only show similar restraint in all other communications.

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

  • #649569
    Kalpana Tiwari, the widow of Late Vivek Tiwari, who was shot dead by police constables in Lucknow's Gomti Nagar, said her faith in the state government has "further strengthened" after she met Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath today. She said this immediately after meeting the UP Chief Minister.
    Come on, have a fight. Don't shoot and scoot.

  • #649587
    Whatever has happened in Gomatinagar in order to discipline the Apple - guy is not acceptable. The cons table were not even on their dresses and this might have created a confusion to the executive regarding the actual identities of the cons tables. It was around dark mid - night carrying a female co- passenger and the executive might have thought the safety - aspect of his co- passenger and with this intention he was in a hurry to take a safe course - allowing to get down the lady at her residence.
    Whatever, the case may be, gunning down the culprit appears to be a barbarous act and the news of their termination should be eye - openers for those violating the code of conduct of Police.

  • #649700
    #649509 Aditya Mohan rightly said. When the police had to shoot a person the cops did not shoot whereas when they should not they did and killed this " apple" employee. This is very shameful. Police men should be given training as when they have to shoot and when not.

    " It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for what you are not" ... Andre Gide

  • #649722
    Encounter happens in almost every country including India. And some of the encounters go wrong everywhere. This is a similar case. The police fired because they thought that the movement of Late Vivek Tiwari was to some extent unnatural.

    The widow of the late person is pained but accepted the explanation of the Chief Minister. The DG of UP Police has apologized without any ifs and buts. The liberal intelligentsia of the country are very disheartened because the family-members of the deceased didn't join the fruitless agitation started by them.

    Come on, have a fight. Don't shoot and scoot.

  • #649723
    Partha, I dont think its an encounter. It is when cop kills a person in self defence and this wasn't done for the self defence. Constable fired Tiwari just because of suspicion.

    The statement given by his wife is really disheartening. I don't know how she got convinced. May be the condensation made her mouth shut.


    " It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for what you are not" ... Andre Gide

  • #649725
    According to the on-duty constables, they fired only when the person tried to run over one of the constables, i.e., in self-defence. But let the probe find out the exact sequence of events.
    Come on, have a fight. Don't shoot and scoot.

  • #649727

    So, you are saying this was an encounter. Something which the Government has categorically denied. If you say that this was an encounter, then it must be true. You must know because you always seem to have inside information which others are unaware of. So, who is lying? You or the authorities?

    Nevertheless, what a damning statement. This information should hit national headlines.

    And, for once I believe you. Although, the question is, who ordered the encounters? By law, the police are not supposed to kill people in encounters, where the victim is unarmed. It is an offence. But you corroborate the theory that the "liberal intelligentsia" is claiming. So, for once you are on the right track!

    You are also justifying encounters. The killing of an unarmed person, without provocation is equal to war crimes. I would like you to provide Instances illustrating encounters happening in almost every country. Don't shoot in the dark - come-out with a proof.

    The widow is an intelligent and confident woman. She, fought her case well, despite her personal grief. She made sure she got what she wanted - all her demands were accepted. It was the media that had helped her. The so-called liberal intelligentsia stood by her and an embarrassed, red-faced establishment had to buckle under pressure. The cops had done everything in their power, to quash the case. Had the liberal intelligentsia not stood by her, she'd still be fighting a lone battle. The interviews that were televised on national television had shown the real anguish and anger of the lady.

    How do you know that the liberal intelligentsia is disheartened? Have they gone public with an announcement to that effect? Please tell, let's become gossip mongers.

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

  • #649728
    What happened to Partha's previous comment? My post was in response to his comment. I am attaching a screenshot because otherwise, my comment doesn't make sense.

    Edited: My bad. The comment is still visible.

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

    Delete Attachment

  • #649786
    I haven't understood anything of #649728. I have not edited/deleted any of my previous comments.

    I have also read the reactions of India's top-level intellectuals of India on Twitter. Many of them expressed their extreme dismay over the reaction of Mrs. Tiwari.

    Further, in almost all my previous comments, I have stated: "But let the probe find out the exact sequence of events".

    Come on, have a fight. Don't shoot and scoot.

  • #649814

    Please read the post at #649728 in its entirety, and then see if you understand it or not, I'll explain it again if it is still not understood.

    Let's discuss the encounter angle. Why do you think this was an encounter gone wrong? You seem to have some inside information. Please share the details.

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

  • #649830
    Different versions from different people. Someone said that the vehicle was stationary with a male and female inside the car while the cops checked the vehicle. Someone said that the vehicle was mobile and the police tried to stop them. Someone says that the policemen were in uniform, and someone says that they were in plain clothes. What is the truth? Only a thorough investigation will let us know what exactly went wrong with the apple guy and the police. In any case, the shooting was not a solution. The guns could have been used to threaten the apple guy.
    No life without Sun

  • #649833
    The constables were in uniform but were behaving in an intimidating manner and it seems whatever action Vivek Tiwari took was out of a concern for the safety of the lady colleague with him. The full details have been revealed by her in an interview with Times of India which I read yesterday.

    You can read the full interview here:

    When you make a commitment, you create hope. When you keep a commitment you create trust! ~ John C. Maxwell

  • #649867
    I read the TOI interview. It is astonishing to read that the lady Sana did not have a mobile phone with her. What about the Apple executive? Did he not have his Mobile phone? It looks strange to me. Sana, Instead of running from pillar to post to get a mobile from the truck driver (who also did not have phones), she should have used the mobile of the executive to inform the incident, if the Apple executive had a phone with him. An executive without a phone !
    @ Daal me kuch Kaala hai.

    No life without Sun

  • #649997
    I agree with Mr. SuN. Zaroor daal-me kuch kala hai. It is upto you to admit it, or not.
    Come on, have a fight. Don't shoot and scoot.

  • #650069
    Of course, dal mein kuch kala hae. Isn't that what this thread is about? That there is something more sinister - the post asks, "who gave cops the right to shoot someone?" We don't have answers to that, yet. Another member who described the incident as an encounter gone wrong has shied away from answering questions directed at them about their statement.

    The ugly truth is that even in such a horrific incident, there are people trying to give it another angle. How corrupt can minds get? Sanity is lost and fanaticism is on the rise.

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

  • #650076
    Another member spread misinformation stating that the policemen were not in uniform. Later it was mentioned clearly in various reports that the policemen were in uniform.
    Come on, have a fight. Don't shoot and scoot.

  • #650081
    There is an explanation for my statement. What I mentioned had been reported by the media. And most channels had covered it as news, during that period. I am surprised that you feign ignorance and call it a misinformation.

    But, I am intrigued by your statement made in #---786. What is the truth about an 'encounter gone wrong'? What is it that you know and now conceal, after having divulged just a wee bit of information? Let us not side-track from the issue, because your statement concurs with what the liberal media has been screaming from behind their news desks. The truth behind the 'daal mein kuch kala' might just lie within your statement.

    I have provided an explanation for my statement, now it's your turn to throw some light, so we can sift the 'kala' from the 'dal'. I have always known you to come out with some relevant and some irrelevant material, in support of your stories and theories. So, what holds you back this time? Did you reveal more than you should have? Did you make a faux pas, that you now regret?

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

  • #650094
    The simple answer to the thread's question "Who gave cops the right to shoot someone? would be "No one, but the conscious of the cop." We do not know the situation that warranted the cop to fire his gun against the Apple executive. Hence no member can post a right response to the thread. We can only assume and presume and discuss this issue .
    After reading the interview of the lady Sana to TOI, I could not believe the situation and trust the lady's statement. An executive of a phone company, and an associate who attended a phone meeting without a phone in hand! Truck drivers without phones. No one found with a phone to help for 15 minutes. It is like a story. Hence, it was said -"Daal meim kuch Kaala Hai," Surely something has gone wrong.

    @ We need not simply answer to an ISC question with Yes or No. We can discuss various issues relating to it.

    No life without Sun

  • #650101

    1. An associate who attended a phone meeting without a phone in hand!
    - People do forget to take phones in the same way that house keys or an ID card is forgotten.

    2. Truck drivers without phones.
    - Quite possible. Even assuming that a truck driver had a phone, would he want to help out? It is a common tendency for the public to avoid getting involved with anything.

    3. An executive of a phone company without a phone
    - Assume he had a phone. It would be an Apple phone with high security locking features. It may have been in his pocket. The lady would not have wanted to touch her injured Boss to try and search for it. The lady may, due to the incident happening suddenly, not have even thought of looking for it, but, instead, decided to look around to see if anybody was around to help.

    Like this, we can make wild surmises. But doubting the statement of the lady colleague and implying that she was guilty of hiding facts, which further implies she was implicitly involved with the shoot-out, is really going overboard. It is like the smirch campaign that was launched to malign the character of the executive and the lady colleague - it was revealed by the media as being fake.

    What I wondered was why the lady was taken to a police station from the hospital. Isn't there some law/rights that no lady can be taken to a police station between 6p.m. and 6a.m. ? Further, wasn't she entitled to call somebody? Why didn't the police in the patrol vehicle which took the executive to the hospital give her a phone to call? Did they also not allow her to call anyone from the hospital or police station? She had to return to her home and take her own phone? There are a lot of ifs and buts on the other side of the coin (post the shooting).

    When you make a commitment, you create hope. When you keep a commitment you create trust! ~ John C. Maxwell

  • #650179
    You are also right with your points. However, I wonder a lady moving out with the permission of her parents for an evening/night meeting not carrying her own phone. These days, cell phones form part and parcel of our life which no one misses. We all sleep with cell phones.

    Generally, when a girl moves out alone, especially at night, her parents ensure that the girl carries her phone to contact them.

    Still, I would say - "Daal mei Kuch Kaala Hai."

    No life without Sun

  • #650200
    The lady in question is not a girl but a grown up adult. This is today, not some archaic era. Parents' permission will not be required. Do you even know her family, with whom she stays?

    Cell phones can be forgotten in a hurry to leave home, as I said. And not everyone misses the phone, nor considers it part and parcel of one's life, nor even sleeps with one, including yours truly. We did just fine without phones earlier, we can do so now as well and not make it a dependency OWL.

    Why are people hell-bent on trying to find fault with the lady colleague?

    When you make a commitment, you create hope. When you keep a commitment you create trust! ~ John C. Maxwell

  • #650204
    It is not a fault finding but a fact-finding. Gone are the days we had nothing to communicate except a letter or a landline phone. These days, we all are married to a cell phone that cannot be parted or divorced but can be changed when they become old or useless.

    While I am trying to find what went wrong, why are you hell-bent to support the lady who may not be a girl but an adult woman. She herself stated to TOI that she took permission from her parents to go for the meeting. So, we can presume that she is unmarried and staying with her parents.

    No life without Sun

  • #650206
    "Why are people hell-bent on trying to find fault with the lady colleague?"

    Armchair judges and jurors are quick to prejudge, and malign people, especially if these people belong to a particular community and/or gender. That has been the trend.

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

  • #650215
    What you said is right. In most cases, the Armchair judges and jurors are quick to prejudge, if they belong to a particular community or gender. But in ISC, we members are not judges to give judgement. We only discuss issues with the difference of opinion between the members interested in the case.

    Truely speaking. I always sleep with my cellphone on my side. Basically, I am a communicator by profession, and I value and respect communication equipment.

    No life without Sun

  • #650219

    Come on, have a fight. Don't shoot and scoot.

  • #650231

    No life without Sun

  • #650233
    It is very wrong to smirch a person's character. This discussion has gone far enough before some more muck is thrown at the deceased person and the witness. We will close it now.
    When you make a commitment, you create hope. When you keep a commitment you create trust! ~ John C. Maxwell

  • This thread is locked for new responses. Please post your comments and questions as a separate thread.
    If required, refer to the URL of this page in your new post.