In 1995, the Uttar Pradesh Police’s Crime Branch-Criminal Investigation Department (CB-CID) recommended registering an FIR against 18 police officers accused of framing 12 men in a Kanpur dacoity case after arresting them in a “fake” encounter. The agency had been tasked by the state government to probe the allegations following a complaint by the relative of one of the men.On October 16, a case was finally lodged against 12 policemen — 10 of whom have retired — at Maharajpur police station on a complaint by CB-CID Inspector Sushil Kumar under IPC sections relating to fabricating evidence, making false charges, wrongful confinement and causing hurt. The other six have since died.In 2007, the agency said, a Kanpur court had acquitted all 12 men accused of dacoity.Dev Prasad Pathak, elder brother of Rakesh, one of the men picked up by the police, who had spent years seeking action on his complaint, said, “We are relieved that the CID found our allegations to be true and registered a case, but we are also astonished that it took the agency and the state government so long to act.”Rakesh died in a road accident in 2002. Pathak said their uncle, Jagdish Dwivedi, and two employees, Dinesh Kumar and Shiv Kumar, were also falsely booked in the case in 1991.According to Pathak, who worked as a property dealer, trouble began after he allegedly refused to give one of the policemen, Vidyasagar Tripathi, then the station house officer (SHO) of Maharajpur police station, three bighas of land free of cost so he could build a house.“The land in Shyam Nagar was worth around Rs 20 lakh at the time. Since I was in the plotting business, I asked him to pay the amount I had spent to purchase the land. However, Tripathi was unwilling to pay anything, so I refused to transfer the land to him. This angered him,” alleged Pathak.Story continues below this ad“The CID had recorded my statement and those of others during its inquiry in 1995, yet the findings and the action taken on them have emerged only now. Since 1996, not a single police officer had come to us in connection with the case,” he further claimed.How police account fell apartAccording to the original police account, Tripathi allegedly received a tip-off on August 22, 1991, that criminals planned to rob vehicles near Narval crossing on GT Road.It was claimed that in the early hours of August 23, police caught 12 men who had cut branches from babul trees and placed them across the road to stop a truck and rob it. Illegal firearms and bombs were allegedly recovered from them.A chargesheet was subsequently filed on charges of preparing to commit dacoity and attempted murder, along with offences under the Arms Act and the Explosive Substances Act.Story continues below this adHowever, the CB-CID inquiry found that the police had allegedly fabricated an encounter story. Instead, the inquiry found, some of the men had been picked up from their homes while they were asleep. Licensed firearms belonging to their family members were allegedly shown as weapons recovered from them.The inquiry also found that truck driver Umashankar Pasi and cleaner Brijendra Singh, both witnesses in the FIR, did not back this version. Both said no one tried to stop their truck at Narval crossing that day.As per the fresh FIR, they said they were travelling from Kanpur to Varanasi in a truck loaded with soap. Around 7 pm or 8 pm, a constable boarded their vehicle near Ramadevi crossing.Five men also approached the truck and asked for a ride. Umashankar initially refused because they appeared to be drunk, but agreed at the constable’s insistence.Story continues below this adAs per the FIR, the constable allegedly asked them to drive the truck to Maharajpur police station and park it there.According to the FIR, he then called a sub-inspector and two-three constables to check the five men. Two men managed to flee while the other three were detained, the witnesses claimed. Police allegedly recovered two country-made pistols, cartridges and three bombs from them.Later that night, the FIR claimed, police personnel went on raids and returned with more men, a rifle and a gun.Inquiry ended in 1995, case took 31 yearsA CB-CID official associated with the case said Inspector R P Singh, who was then posted with the agency, conducted the inquiry and recorded statements from people connected with the case, including Pathak and his family.Story continues below this ad“Singh completed the inquiry in 1995 and recommended registering an FIR against the police personnel, along with steps to clear the names of those who had been booked,” the official saidThe report was sent to the agency’s headquarters, which was to forward it to the state government for directions on further action. However, it remained pending with the department and the government for years.The official said the CB-CID headquarters recently reviewed its backlog of cases awaiting action and found Pathak’s complaint to be the oldest. “The agency sought fresh directions and a criminal case was registered,” the official said.When contacted, CB-CID Superintendent of Police, Daya Ram, said a case had been registered but that he could not explain the delay as he had been assigned duty outside the district. He advised contacting senior officials for further details, but they could not be reached for comment.Story continues below this adFor Pathak, the registration of the case marks a first step after more than three decades of waiting. “A Kanpur court cleared my brother and the others of the charges. Now, the government has finally had a case registered against the policemen accused of framing innocent people. This is the first step towards justice,” he said.