A fight inside the court campus in the Madhubani district of Bihar exposed the growing gap between the judiciary and the police department. Two police officials assaulted the Additional district judge 1, Avinash Kumar of Jhanjharpur sub-divisional court of Madhubani district in Bihar, at gunpoint, on November 18.
Officials identified were the officer-in-charge of Ghoghardiha police station Gopal Krishna, and sub-inspector Abhimanyu Kumar Sharma.
Instead of expressing regret over the shameful incident of assault between the district judge and the police officers, why are both the parties accusing them of counter-accusation? Incidents of organized attacks on officers and employees by mobs have happened in Bihar in the past as well.
For example, December 5 is the 27th anniversary of the murder of G Krishnaiah. Krishnaiah used to be the District Magistrate of Gopalganj. On December 5, 1994, he was going to Patna in his official car. On the way, a mob dragged him out of the car and brutally killed him. Three decades have passed since this incident. Meanwhile, power also changed in Bihar. The government made claims that the law and order situation in the state is better than ever. But the incident in Jhanjharpur has put a big question mark on these claims.
The police administration and judiciary are in a tizzy due to the assault on Judge Avinash Kumar. Questions are being raised that when a judicial officer can be attacked inside the court premises, then to what extent can the rest of the officers and employees be considered safe? The debate has intensified that when only senior officers are not safe from police brutality, what will be the condition of the common person?
Some people consider this a clear issue of police arbitrariness. At the same time, some believe that the workload on the police is too much due to systematic shortcomings.
Some people are also considering the pride of position and power as the reason for the incident. ADJ Avinash Kumar, who has been known for releasing people on bail on unique conditions, has been in the news in the past due to some of his decisions. Some of these judgments are related to special conditions for grant of bail. For example, in Laukaha police station, a case was registered against Lalan Safi for molesting women. Avinash Kumar granted bail to the accused on the condition that he would wash and press the clothes of the village women free of cost for six months. Similarly, bail was granted to Nitish Kumar Yadav, accused of a case registered in Madhepur police station, on the condition that he would give free education to the children of five low-income families.
Other cases included bail for Neeraj Kumar Safi to make five poor illiterate women and girls literate, Mohd Rustam for cleaning the drain, Mohammad Shabir to skill five unemployed people, Rajiv Kumar and Nitish Kumar to distribute free pulses among the flood victims and Ram Kumar was given bail on the condition of free shramdan in the temple under construction.
However, on September 24, 2021, the Patna High Court had also issued an order to stay his decision in a case. There was a dispute with the police department, and there have been reports of differences between ADJ Avinash Kumar and the police department for some time. During the hearing of a case of the kidnapping of a girl registered in Bhairavsthan police station of Jhanjharpur subdivision, Avinash Kumar had raised serious questions on the working style of the police. He had sought clarification from SP Dr Satyaprakash, DSP Ashish Anand and the in-charge of Bhairavsthan police station Rupak Kumar. Strong objection was also lodged for not imposing relevant sections.
Along with this, he had written a letter to the Union Home Minister and the DGP of the state, asking that SP Satyaprakash should be sent to the National Police Academy in Hyderabad on training for the knowledge of the law. These incidents may also be the reason for the recent controversy.