In a significant development, three police personnel, including a Station House Officer (SHO), were suspended in Amroha on Saturday for allegedly attempting to cover up a case involving a man's self-immolation during a loan recovery process in Panju Sarai village, Bijnor district.
Incident Details
According to investigators, on May 14, a joint team comprising bank representatives, revenue officials (including a naib tehsildar), and police officers visited Panju Sarai village to take possession of a house linked to a loan of Rs 15 lakh taken by Ashok Prajapati from a bank in 2019. Prajapati, a vegetable vendor, allegedly poured a flammable substance on himself and set himself on fire during the recovery attempt, sustaining severe burn injuries. He was immediately rushed to the district hospital in critical condition and later transferred to a medical facility in Delhi for advanced treatment.
Family's Allegations
Prajapati's family alleged that the officials arrived at their home without prior notice and subjected them to harassment, leading to a heated confrontation that culminated in the self-immolation. They accused the authorities of aggressive behavior, which they claimed provoked the extreme act.
Police Headquarters' Findings
However, a subsequent inquiry by the police headquarters revealed that the officers present at the scene failed to inform their seniors about the incident and attempted to conceal it. Terming this a "serious lapse in duty," Amroha Superintendent of Police (SP) Lakhan Singh Yadav ordered the immediate suspension of three personnel: SHO of Naugawan Sadat, Balendra Kumar; Mundakhera outpost in-charge Pravindra Kumar; and beat constable Hemant Kumar. The suspension takes effect immediately, pending further investigation.
Broader Context and Implications
This incident highlights the tensions often associated with loan recovery processes, especially in rural areas where borrowers may face extreme pressure. The case has drawn attention to the need for proper protocols and sensitivity when dealing with debt recovery. The suspended officers face disciplinary action for dereliction of duty and attempting to suppress a serious incident. The investigation is ongoing, and further actions may be taken based on the findings.
