Police for the people

The Supreme Court orders will change the very philosophy of police functioning

The Supreme Court has, in a landmark judgment on September 22, demolished in one stroke the colonial police structure which was hanging like a millstone around our necks for the last 145 years and more. The Police Act of 1861, it may be recalled, was designed by the British to raise a police force which would be 8216;politically useful8217;. The Revolt of 1857 had shaken the foundations of British rule in India. It was therefore felt that they must have a police force which would uphold the interests of the imperial power and carry out its diktat, right or wrong, lawful or unlawful.

At the dawn of independence, the political masters should have restructured the police and made it accountable to the people. This transformation was unfortunately not carried out. As the years passed, every successive government found it convenient to use, misuse and abuse the police for its partisan political ends. In 1977, the government appointed the National Police Commission NPC as it felt that 8220;far reaching changes have taken place in the country8221; since independence but 8220;there has been no comprehensive review of the police system after independence despite radical changes in the political, social and economic situation in the country8221;. The NPC submitted eight detailed reports between 1979-81 containing comprehensive recommendations covering the entire gamut of police functioning. The Central government, however, gave only a cosmetic response to the commission8217;s recommendations.

It was against this background that I, a former director-general of the Border Security Force, filed a PIL in the Supreme Court in 1996 with the objective, essentially, of freeing the police from the stranglehold of politicians and making it accountable to the laws of the land and the Constitution of the country. It is significant that while the PIL was progressing in the Supreme Court, three committees were appointed by the government at different periods of time to deliberate on the question of police reforms: the Ribeiro Committee in 1998, the Padmanabhaiah Committee in 2000 and the Malimath Committee on the Criminal Justice System in 2002. All the aforesaid committees broadly came to the same conclusions and emphasised the urgent need for police reforms in the context of new challenges. However, the much needed reforms were never carried out because of the combined opposition of the political parties.

The dilemma before the Supreme Court was whether it should wait further for the government to take suitable steps for police reforms. However, as recorded in the judgment, 8220;having regard to i the gravity of the problem; ii the urgent need for preservation and strengthening of Rule of Law; iii pendency of even this petition for last over ten years; iv the fact that various Commissions and Committees have made recommendations on similar lines for introducing reforms in the police set up in the country; and v total uncertainty as to when police reforms would be introduced, we think that there cannot be any further wait, and the stage has come for issue of appropriate directions for immediate compliance so as to be operative till such time a new model Police Act is prepared by the Central Government and/or the State Governments pass the requisite legislations8221;.

The Supreme Court has ordered the setting up of three institutions at the state level with a view to insulating the police from extraneous influences, giving it functional autonomy and ensuring its accountability. These institutions are the State Security Commission, which would lay down the broad policies and give directions for the performance of the preventive tasks and service-oriented functions of the police; the Police Establishment Board, which would comprise the director general of police and four other senior officers of the department which shall decide all transfers, postings, promotions and other service related matters of officers of and below the rank of deputy superintendent of police; and a Police Complaints Authority at the district and state levels, with a view to inquiring into allegations of misconduct by police personnel.

Besides, the apex court has ordered that the director general of police shall be selected by the state government from among the three senior-most officers of the department who have been empanelled for promotion to that rank by the UPSC, and that he shall have a prescribed minimum tenure of two years. The chief minister would now not be able to just say 8216;talaq8217; and throw out the DGP. Police officers on operational duties in the field like the IG i/c Zone, DIG i/c Range, SP i/c District and SHO i/c Police Station would also have a minimum tenure of two years. Transfers had become an industry in the states. Every time there was a change of regime, officers were moved en masse. Such administrative manipulation on political grounds should now become a thing of the past. The court also ordered the separation of the investigating police from the police involved in law and order, to ensure speedier investigation, better expertise and improved rapport with the people.

The Union government has also been asked to set up a National Security Commission for the selection and placement of heads of central police organisations, upgrading the effectiveness of these forces and improving the service conditions of its personnel.

Story continues below this ad

The Supreme Court orders are going to have very far reaching implications. They would change the working philosophy of the police, which should in future reflect the democratic aspirations of the people. As the new arrangements are put in place, we should see a people-friendly police gradually emerging from the shadows.

The transition is, however, not going to be smooth. Vested interests whose power to manipulate and abuse the police has been taken away, will try to scuttle such reform through every means possible. Conscious of the possible road blocks, the Supreme Court has ordered the Central and the state governments to file affidavits of compliance by January 3, 2007.

The present generation of police officers will also have to rise to the occasion and fulfill the expectations of the people. They will have to demonstrate that the Force is now a Service and that what was the ruler8217;s police is now a people8217;s police.

The writer, a former director general of the BSF, was a petitioner in the case