In a dramatic turn of events, former IPS officer Amitabh Thakur, currently incarcerated in Deoria district jail, has launched an indefinite hunger strike. The protest, which began on Thursday evening, is a direct challenge to the administration's alleged failure to provide crucial CCTV footage related to his arrest.
Core of the Protest: A Demand for Transparency
Thakur has levelled serious allegations against the authorities, claiming they have repeatedly ignored his demands for video evidence. He specifically seeks the CCTV footage and DVR recordings from the time of his arrest, which took place inside a train at Shahjahanpur. The former officer insists this material is vital for proving procedural lapses during his detention.
Amidst heightened security, Thakur was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) court on Friday for a hearing on his bail plea. However, the court did not reach a final decision and adjourned the hearing to Saturday. During the proceedings, his legal counsel strongly argued for bail, highlighting alleged irregularities and a lack of transparency in the arrest process.
The Legal Case and Thakur's Counter-Move
The case against Amitabh Thakur stems from accusations of irregularities in the allotment of land at Industrial Estate Purwa. The charges suggest records were manipulated in the name of his wife. While the legal battle continues, Thakur has taken his grievance outside the courtroom.
He has stated clearly that his hunger strike is a direct action to secure the CCTV footage and CDR (Call Detail Records) from his arrest at Shahjahanpur railway station and the subsequent time at the police station. To escalate the matter, Thakur has also written a formal letter to the chief justice and informed the court of his protest action.
A Standoff with Broader Implications
This case has now evolved beyond the initial land allotment allegations. It has become a flashpoint concerning police accountability and procedural integrity. Thakur's hunger strike places significant pressure on the administration to address his demands for evidence, setting a tense stage for the next court hearing on Saturday. The outcome could have wider ramifications for how arrest procedures and evidence disclosure are handled in similar cases.
