LAW AND ORDER ADMINISTRATION:

Law and order administration is one of the most important function performed by
the Government. In fact,the survival of administration depends upon maintenance
of law and order in a country. The functioning of law and order administration comes
under the state list with the Union/Central government having advisory and
coordinating role(discussed in last post on this blog). Rapid growth of
population,industrialisation,urbanisation,growing political consciousness lead to law
and order problems. Agrarian and tribal revolts,political caste and communal
violence,labour and student unrest and terrorism are indications of law and order
problems.
Law and Order comes under the Ministry of Home affairs' Department of Internal
Security in India. As such law and order and internal security are managed under
one umbrella at the level of the Union Government. The Ministry of Home Affairs is
responsible for matters relating to the internal security of the country and enacts
laws for the functioning of the criminal justice system. Refer
-http://india.gov.in/citizen/lawnorder.php
However, 'Police' and 'Public Order' are matters of State Governance and not Union
governance, according to Schedule VII, making the management of law and order in
India complex.

BRITISH LEGACY OF LAW AND ORDER ADMINISTRATION:

The First Police Commission, appointed on 17 August 1860, contained detailed
guidelines for the desired system of police in India and defined police as a
governmental department to maintain order, enforce the law, and prevent and
detect crime.
The present Indian Police system is based on the Police Act of 1861. Under this act
the police was made subordinate to the executive government. Later several
changes were brought about in the structure as well as functioning of the police
system in the country,but the basic structure and characteristics are enshrined in
the Police Act of 1861 and it continues to dominate over the police system in India.
Similarly, the Indian Penal Code(1860) and Criminal Procedure Code(1861) and the
Indian Evidence Act were compiled and enacted for effective law and order.
Much before the Independence, superior police officers belonging to the Imperial
Police (IP) were appointed by the Secretary of State on the basis of competitive
examination. The very first open civil service examination for the service was held

in England in June, 1893 and the top ten candidates were appointed as probationers
of the Indian (Imperial) Police. However, it is not possible to pinpoint a date on
which it could positively be claimed that the Indian Police came into being.
In around 1907, the Secretary of State's officers were directed to wear the letters
"IP" on their epaulets to distinguish them from the other officers not recruited by
the Secretary of State. In this sense, 1907 could be regarded as the starting point
for the Indian Police. However, one must note that the
The Indian Police Service is not a force itself but a service providing leaders and
commanders to staff the state police and all-India para-military forces. Its members,
who are all at least university graduates, are the senior officers of the police.
With the passage of time Indian Police Service's objectives were updated and
redefined, the roles and functions of an Indian Police Service Officer are as follows:
To fulfill duties based on broader responsibilities, in the areas of maintenance of
public peace and order, crime prevention, investigation, and detection, collection of
intelligence, VIP security, counter- terrorism, border policing, railway policing,
tackling smuggling, drug trafficking, economic offences, corruption in public life,
disaster management, enforcement of socio-economic legislation, bio-diversity and
protection of environmental laws etc.
Leading and commanding the Indian intelligence agencies like Research and
Analysis Wing (R& Intelligence Bureau (IB), Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI),
Crime Investigation Department (CID) etc., Indian federal law enforcement
agencies, civil and armed police forces in all the and union territories.
Leading and commanding the Para-Military Forces of India (PMF) which include the
Central P Organisations (CPO) and Central Paramilitary Forces (CPF) such as Border
Security Force ( Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Indo-Tibetan Border Police
(ITBP), National Security G (NSG), Rashtriya Rifles, Central Industrial Security Force
(CISF), Vigilance Organisations, I Federal Law Enforcement Agencies, Assam Rifles,
etc.
Serve at head of the departments in policy making in the Ministries and
Departments of C and State Governments and public sector undertakings both at
centre and states, Government India.
To interact and coordinate closely with the members of other All-India Services
and Central Services and also with the Indian Armed Forces
Last but not the least, to lead and command the force with courage, uprightness,
dedication a strong sense of service to the people.
Endeavour to inculcate in the police forces under their command such values and
norms as help them serve the people better.
Inculcate integrity of the highest order, sensitivity to aspirations of people in a
fast-changing and economic milieu, respect for human rights, broad liberal
perspective of law and justice and standard of professionalism.

The District Collector's office was formed to be in charge of the police and maintain

law and order at the district level as he also functions as a District Magistrate. This
has been discussed in previous post on this blog, refer dist admin.

NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION:

The National Police Commission (NPC) was appointed by the Government of India in
1977
with wide terms of reference covering the police organisation, its role, functions,
accountability, relations with the public, political interference in its work, misuse of
powers,
evaluation of its performance etc. This was the first Commission appointed at the
national
level after Independence. The Commission produced eight reports between 1979
and 1981,
suggesting wide ranging reforms in the existing police set-up.
For the major recommendations,implementations and status refer
-http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/police/npc_recommendations.pdf
And also refer to this link for other committees and commissions set up after the
National Police Commission
-http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/police/police_reform_debates_in_i
ndia.pdf
Lack of political will still comes in between implementing the recommendations of
the above as the abovementioned Commissions and Committees recommendations
lie unimplemented.

INVESTIGATIVE AGENCIES:
1) Central Bureau Of Investigation - The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is
India's premier investigative agency, responsible for a wide variety of criminal and
national security matters. It was established on 1 April 1963 and evolved from

the Special Police Establishment founded in 1941. The Central Bureau of

Investigation is controlled by the Department of Personnel and Training in the
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension of the Union Government
usually headed by a Union Minister who reports directly to the Prime Minister. It is
Indias official Interpol unit. The CBI draws its officers from the best IPS and IRS
officers around the country. It is responsible for investigation into various crimes and
national security. The agency specializes in investigating crimes involving high
ranking government officials and politicians.

2) The Indian Income-tax Department: Is India's premier financial agency,

responsible for a wide variety of financial and fiscal matters.The Tax department is
controlled by the Department of Revenue in the Ministry of Finance of the Union
Government headed by a Union Minister who reports directly to the Prime Minister.
It's officers are drawn from the Indian Revenue Services across the country. The
Directorate General of Income Tax Investigation is responsible for investigation into
various economic crimes and tax evasion.The special agents and agents are able to
carry firearms when they are posted in the Directorate of Criminal Investigation
(DCI) in the I-T department .The Finance Ministry has recently notified bringing
under one umbrella the intelligence and criminal investigation units of the Income
Tax department to effectively deal with terror financing cases and transactions that
pose threat to national security.The department will now recruit special agents and
agents (criminal investigation) under the new wing, half of whom would be recruited
or brought on deputation from premier investigative agencies and police
organisations of the country.The special agents who will form part of the premier
DCI would be able to carry firearms under the rules prescribed by their parent
organisation and would be able to tackle any intimidation in course of their new
duty of checking and gathering intelligence on tax evasion.
The DCI will be headed by the Director General of Intelligence (Income Tax) and was
notified in May this year to tackle the menace of black money with cross-border
ramifications.The revamp is aimed at launching 'un-intrusive' investigations against
"persons and transactions suspected to be involved in criminal activities having
cross-border, inter-state or international ramifications, that pose a threat to national
security and are punishable under the direct tax laws."
The commissioners of the intelligence directorate of I-T who are posted in cities like
Delhi, Chandigarh, Jaipur, Ahmedabad, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata and Lucknow will
also take up criminal investigation work under the DCI."Criminal investigation relies
heavily on accurate and specific actionable intelligence and information of such
activities and hence such an arrangement has been made.Separate manpower for
the criminal investigation unit will be raised in the next few years when the
department gets additional sanction. The intelligence wing of the I-T department
has the Central Information Branch (CIB) under it, which is a repository of classified
and exhaustive data on taxpayers' financial transactions.

3) Directorate of Revenue Intelligence: The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

(DRI) is an intelligence-based organisation responsible for the co-ordination of
India's anti-smuggling efforts.Officers in this organisation are drawn from Indian
Revenue Service(I.R.S.)
4) National Investigation Agency: National Investigation Agency (NIA) is the
central agency to combat terror in India. The agency is empowered to deal with
terror related crimes across states without special permission from the states. The
National Investigation Agency Bill 2008 to create the agency was moved in
Parliament by Union Home Minister on 16 December 2008.The NIA was created in
response to the Nov 2008 Mumbai terror attacks as need for a central agency to
combat terrorism was found. It also deals with drug trafficking and currency
counterfeiting.It draws it's officers from IRS and IPS.
5) Narcotics Control Bureau - The NCB is responsible for anti-narcotic operations
all over the country. It checks the spread of contraband as well as the cultivation of
drugs.The officers in this organisation are drawn from both the IRS and the IPS.
6) Central Forensic Science Laboratory: The Central Forensic Science
Laboratory (CFSL) is a wing of the Indian Ministry of Home Affairs, which fulfils the
forensic requirements in the country. It houses the only DNA repository in South and
Southeast Asia.
There are four central forensic laboratories in India, at Hyderabad,
Kolkata,Mumbai,Rajkot, Chandigarh,Pune and New Delhi. CFSL Hyderabad is centre
of excellence in chemical sciences, CFSL Kolkata in biological sciences and CFSL
Chandigarh in physical sciences. These laboratories are under the control of the
Directorate of Forensic Science (DFS) of the Ministry of Home Affairs. The laboratory
in New Delhi is under the control of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and
investigates cases on its behalf.

ROLE OF CENTRAL AND STATE AGENCIES IN MAINTENANCE OF LAW AND

ORDER AND COUNTERING INSURGENCY & TERRORISM:
CENTRAL AGENCIES - Government of India is divided into the Legislative, the
Executive and the Judiciary wings, with each performing its respective roles in
management of internal security(maintaining cross border peace) and law and order
of India.

National Security Council comprising of the Strategic Policy Group, the National
Security Advisory Board and a Secretariat represented by the Joint Intelligence
Committee (India) is the apex agency looking into the overall security (both internal
and external security of India) Law and Order itself comes under the Ministry of
Home affairs' Department of Internal Security in India.
For the Executive, the Ministry of Home Affairs is responsible for internal security of
India and enactment of laws for the functioning of the criminal justice system in the
country.
Several laws have been enacted to ensure general peace in India, maintain law and
order and maintain its national integrity. Several law enforcement agencies have
been created to tackle the problem of maintaining law and order in the country.
Crimes are managed separately by the Criminal courts of the country.

STATE AGENCIES: To perform the task of law and order administration, a state
government maintains a separate department called the Home Department. The
administrative head of this department is the Secretary,drawn as a rule from the
generalist Indian Administrative Service ( IAS). The Home Department administers
the police. Under the administrative control of the Home Department comes the
executive organisation namely the Police department headed by the Deputy General Of Police,who as a rule is drawn from the Indian Police Service. He may
have an Additional Director General of Police to assist him. The Police Hierarchy
comprises Inspectors - General of Police,Deputy Inspectors General of
Police,Superintendents of Police and other lower level functionaries.
The basic unit of law and order administration in a state is the police thana headed
by the Station House Officer ( SHO) who is assisted by a complement of Inspectors,
sub-inspectors,head constables and constables.
The Superintendent of Police in charge of the district police is an important
functionary and is subject to control and supervision by a Deputy Inspector General of Police, who is generally placed in charge of a group of districts.
THe overall command and control are exercised by the Director - General of Police
at the state level. Officers in charge of sub units within a district like sub
divisions,circles and police stations are subordinate to the Superintendent of Police.
The District Police is thus an integral part of the state wide police setup,which is
hierarchically structured and held togethe by bonds of strong discipline and control.
The District collector/Deputy COmmissioner who is head of the District
administration and apart from his other duties is responsible for the law and order
administration in the district police assisted by the police head , the Superintendent
of the Police ( District).
In Metropolitan cities, there is the Police Commissionerate system like
Mumbai,Kolkata,etc who reports to the state home ministry and is assisted by Joint

commissioners of police who is in charge of the city range ( north range,south

range,etc),Deputy Commissioner of Police ( incharge of the district) and ACP ( who
is the head of sub division),and Station House Officer ( incharge of a police station)
and other junior staff.
Delhi which is a Metropolitan has the COmmissionerate system who also enjoys
magisterial powers but the reports directly to the Lieutenant Governor who reports
to the President ( indirectly to the Central govt.)
The reputation of a state depends on how effectively it is able to maintain law and
order withing its jurisdiction as freedom and independence will not have meaning
unless such basic issues are properly attended to.
Unfortunately,in view of the prevailing atmosphere of violence in the
country,attention to law and order is called for,but,the sad part is that this is being
neglected in favour of development administration.
Therefore,it is imperative that law and order is given adequate attention and it is
built up both on the infrastructural as well as intelligence and implementation level
and its grievances and issues sorted out if we want a sound welfare state where
development and law and order go hand in hand otherwise development will be
stalled.

ROLE OF PARAMILITARY FORCES IN MAINTENANCE OF LAW AND ORDER

AND COUNTERING INSURGENCY & TERRORISM:
A paramilitary is a military force whose function and organization are similar to
those of a professional military, but which is not considered part of a state's formal
armed forces.
Paramilitary forces(Except the State Armed Police Forces) in India are under the
Central govt. and under their orders. The paramilitary forces are:
Assam Rifles - Performs many roles including the provision of internal security
under the control of the army through the conduct of counter insurgency and border
security operations, provision of aid to the civil power in times of emergency, and
the provision of communications, medical assistance and education in remote areas.
In times of war they can also be used as a combat force to secure rear areas if
needed.

 Border Security Force - For manning the land borders of the country except in
the mountains.
Central Industrial Security Force - It was created for the better protection and
security of industrial undertakings. It is the largest Industrial security force in the
world.
Central Reserve Police Force - Its primary role lies in assisting the State/Union
Territories in police operations to maintain law and order and contain insurgency. It
has been of extreme significance in J&K especially during elections.
Defence Security Corps- The role of Defence Security Corps is to ensure the
protection and security of designated Defence Installations against sabotage and
pilferage. The Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) and the Defence Security
Corps (DSC) provide security at India's nuclear laboratories and Defence Research
and Development Organisation (DRDO) establishments, respectively. The CISF is
purely a civilian Central government security force and though the DSC is a force
under the Ministry of Defence and it comprises mainly superannuated soldiers who
are re-employed for a few years.
Indo-Tibetan Border Police - For manning the border with Tibet/China in the
Himalaya
National Security Guards - Is a special force in India that has primarily been
utilized for counter-terrorism activities. It's use in the Taj hotel terrorist attack in
Mumbai 2008 has been the most recent and major highlighted one.
Railway Protection Force - The duties of the Railway Protection Force include: i)
To do all conducive means for the free movement of the railways. ii) Protection and
safeguarding of railway property. iii) Protection and safeguarding of passenger,their
belonging and passenger area.
Rashtriya Rifles -A counter-insurgency/anti-terrorist force made up of soldiers
deputed from other parts of the Indian Army, who receive special incentives while
serving in the Rashtriya Rifles. It is deployed in J&K to tackle insurgency and
terrorism.
Special Frontier Force - Conceived in the post Sino-Indian war period as a
guerrilla force composed mainly of Tibetan refugees whose main goal was to
conduct covert operations behind Chinese lines in case of another war between the
People's Republic of China and India. It functions under the Research And Analysis
Wing of the GOI.
Rapid Action Force - It was created to deal with riots & related unrest.
Sashastra Seema Bal - For guarding the Indo-Nepal and Indo-Bhutan Borders.

 Indian Coast Guard - Its mission is the protection of India's maritime interests
and enforcement of maritime law with jurisdiction over both territorial (including
contiguous zone & exclusive economic zone) and international waters.
The State Armed Police Forces of India are the police units for dealing with serious
law and order situations requiring a higher level of armed expertise than normal in
states. The State Armed Police Forces exist in addition to the ordinary police
services of the various states.

RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS WING and INTELLIGENCE BUREAU:

The Research and Analysis Wing (RAW or R&AW) is an external intelligence agency
of the Republic of India.Its creation was necessitated by the poor performance of the
Intelligence Bureau(IB, which then handled both internal and external intelligence)
in the recent wars against China (1962) and the Pakistan (1965) convinced the
government that a specialized, independent agency was required for competent
external intelligence gathering.The primary function of the RAW is collection of
external intelligence, counter-terrorism and covert operations. In addition, it is
responsible for obtaining and analyzing information about foreign governments,
corporations, and persons, to advise Indian policymakers. It has been said that RAW
is the "effective instrument of India's national power". RAW is also involved in the
security of India's nuclear programme. The working of the RAW is not answerable to
the Parliament of India and it works under the Prime Minister of India.
The present RAW objectives include, and are not limited to:

Monitoring the political and military developments in adjoining countries,

which have direct bearing on India's national security and the formulation of
its foreign policy.

Secondly, molding international public opinion with the help of the strong and
vibrant Indian diaspora.

In the past, following the Sino-Indian war of 1962 and due to India's volatile
relations with Pakistan, RAW's objectives had also consisted the following:

To watch the development of international communism and the schism

between the two big communist nations, the Soviet Union and China. As with

other countries, both these powers had direct access to the communist
parties in India.

To control and limit the supply of military hardware to Pakistan, from mostly
European countries, America and more importantly from China

The Intelligence Bureau is India's internal intelligence agency and reputedly the
world's oldest intelligence agency. It was recast as the Central Intelligence Bureau in
1947 under the Ministry of Home Affairs. Shrouded in secrecy, the IB is used to
garner intelligence from within India and also execute counter-intelligence and
counter-terrorism tasks. The Bureau comprises employees from law enforcement
agencies, mostly from the Indian Police Service (IPS) and the military. However, the
Director of Intelligence Bureau (DIB) has always been an IPS officer. In addition to
domestic intelligence responsibilities, the IB is particularly tasked with intelligence
collection in border areas, following the 1951 recommendations of the Himmatsinhji
Committee (also known as the North and North-East Border Committee), a task
entrusted to military intelligence organizations prior to independence in 1947. All
spheres of human activity within India and in the neighborhood are allocated to the
charter of duties of the Intelligence Bureau. The IB was also tasked with other
external intelligence responsibilities as of 1951 until 1968, when the Research and
Analysis Wing was formed.
The workings of these two and their intelligence keep the cycle of law and order
going and gets the central and state law enforcement agencies, military and
paramilitary forces into motion for the same.

CRIMINALISATION OF POLITICS AND ADMINISTRATION:

On 28th August 1997, the Election Commissioner Krishnamurthy made a startling
annunciation. According to him, of 1, 37,752 candidates who had contested the
General Election to the Lok Sabha in 1996, nearly 1500 had criminal records.
Criminalisation of politics is present in every party whether ruling or non ruling.
The radical cause of increasing criminalisation of politics is nexus of muscle power,
money power and politics.
In order to garner a ticket and votes candidates appraise and spend a huge amount
compared to meagre limits. These funds are garnered from funds and

donations,which come from unhealthy sources like mafias, local dons and
corporates,among others. These sources then capture the MLA or MP they funded
and make them indebted to them by making the politicians puppets in their hands
for giving ends to their vested interest. Thus, people's needs and interests are not
bothered about and these people are the ones who rule the roost through their
puppet politicians.
On May 2, 2002, the Supreme Court gave a historic ruling following public interest
litigation by an NGO.
It ruled that every candidate, contesting an election to Parliament, State
Legislatures or Municipal Corporation, has to declare the following along with the
application for his/her candidature:

A candidate's criminal charges

The candidate's financial records

The candidate's educational qualifications

If the candidate fails to file any of the above three declarations, the Returning
Officer will have the right to reject his nomination papers. The Supreme Court has
ruled that all the three declarations will have to be true.
The Election Commission had sent a notification on June 28, 2002, to all State
Election Officers with a view to enforcing it. The Supreme Court's thrust has been
that the people and the voters have the right to know about the candidate's
criminal record, assets and liabilities and educational qualifications. The Returning
Officer has to publish these declarations for the voters' knowledge.
The Election Commission under T S Krishnamurthy proposed in its 2004 report that
Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 should be amended to
disqualify candidates accused of an offence punishable by imprisonment of 5 years
or more even when trial is pending, given that the Court has framed charges
against the person. In the report the Commission addresses the possibility that such
a provision could be misused in the form of motivated cases by the ruling party.
To prevent such misuse, the Commission suggested a compromise whereas only
cases filed prior to six months before an election would lead to disqualification of a
candidate. In addition, the Commission proposed that Candidates found guilty by a
Commission of Enquiry should stand disqualified.
The Court held that the right to information - the right to know antecedents,
including the criminal past, or assets of candidates - was a fundamental right under
Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution and that the information was fundamental for
survival of democracy.
Well this is just a guideline and the people are unaware about this and continue to
vote blindfolded. The criminals will disclose their records on an election form(and

most of the time it is not verified whether true or false)but their physical influence
outside the booth,monetarily as well as muscle power will not stop inducing people
to vote for them. Therefore, it is for us people to wake up, use RTI as well as other
sources to vote for the right candidate with all knowledge and throw out this
disease as it is thwarting the very ideas of democracy and Constitutional safeguards
that our country stands on.

POLICE - PUBLIC RELATIONS:

i) Since the Police administration is based on law made in 1861 and not undergone
any significant change, therefore, the colonial attitudes of police personnel still
remain. The erstwhile police force of the British Raj who were trained to administer
terror over our people for the perpetuation of foreign domination seem to heavily
inspire our current Police administration who feel its their duty to treat a layman or
a common citizen unfairly.
ii) We need to understand that the idea of having a welfare state envisaged by our
constitutional experts stands completely null and void, in absence of a proper
criminal justice system. And here, Police machinery plays one of the most important
roles in order to set criminal law into motion by lodging FIRs and conducting
unbiased and speedy investigation. Moreover, in order to accomplish the solemn
purpose of having a crime free society, more onerous duty is cast on the Police and
learned magistrates. There is a well demarcated sphere of activity between the field
of crime detection and crime punishment. Investigation of an offence is the field
exclusively reserved for the executive through the police department, the
superintendence over which vests in the State Government. The executive who is
charged with a duty to keep vigilance over law and order situation is obliged to
prevent crime and if an offence is alleged to have been committed it is its bounden
duty to investigate into the offence and bring the offenders to book. Needless to
state the ill consequences which can follow if the police refuses to investigate a
cognizable offence (offences in which the police is duty bound to lodge an FIR,
without acquiring prior permission of a magistrate in order to investigate the case,
together with the power to arrest without warrant) such as theft, murder, dacoity,
rape, hurt, assault, robbery, trespass, cheating etc). As per the scheme and policy
of the criminal procedure code no investigation in an offence can be commenced
without registration of FIRs.
iii) Apart from the above, there have also been several studies and commissions set
up to study and reform public-police relations and it was found that the public have
greater dissatisfaction and disenchantment with the working of the police. Apathy of

the police,inefficiency and incapacity of the police has given a poor image to it as
people are in fear of even approaching it.
iv) Recent years have seen an upsurge in terrorism and violence in different parts of
the country and the police is expected to take care of law and order to curb the
problem. But their failure to do so has led to worsening of the situation and given an
all the more bad reputation to the police in the eyes of the common man.
v) People are unaware of their rights and duties and so there leaves ample scope for
the police or for that matter any organisation to take the law in their hands
and exploit the common man.

Let's discuss the reforms in Police that would help resolve the above.

REFORMS IN POLICE:
The police personnel have a vital role in a parliamentary democracy. The society
perceives them as custodians of law and order and providing safety and security to
all. This essentially involves continuous police-public interface. The ever changing
societal situation in terms of demography, increasing rate and complexity of crime
particularly of an organized nature and also accompanied by violence, agitations,
violent demonstrations, variety of political activities, left wing terrorism, insurgency,
militancy, enforcement of economic and social legislations, etc. have further added
new dimensions to the responsibilities of police personnel. Of late, there has been
growing realization that police personnel have been functioning with a variety of
constraints and handicaps, reflecting in their performance, thus becoming a major
concern for both central and state governments. In addition, there is a feeling that
the police performance has been falling short of public expectations, which is
affecting the overall image of the police in the country. With a view to making the
police personnel more effective and efficient especially with reference to their,
professionalism and public interface several initiatives have been launched from
time to time.
Some of the steps suggested by the National Police Commission in this direction
are:
To bring about a change of attitude of police personnel so that they
become people friendly.
To bring about more transparency and openness in police working.
To improve public image and public participation in police working.
To make the police more efficient and effective.

In order to achieve the above mention direction, the Ministry of Home Affairs with
the support of UNDP has taken up an experimental project covering nine police
stations in Rajasthan, Tamilnadu and Assam. One of the major aims of this project is
to revise the curricula for training of police personnel at State Police Training
Institutions.
Police sensitisation training has also been initiated to rid the police of their colonial
attitudes and high handed behaviour.
Over working the staff, lack of manpower, improper or no proper infrastructure to
carry out their duties,no reward system, no proper growth system,major political
and bureaucratic interference and stranglehold,etc.
The recommendations of the National Police Commission to set up State security
boards in order to make the police force more accountable and responsible but
unfortunately they have been constituted in only a few states and that too they are
not up to the mark.
The Supreme Court in 2006 gave directives which were to be followed till the states
come up with their police acts.

First was to set up a State Security Commission which would insulate the police
form unwarranted political interference. Political control is necessary but it needs to
be conditioned in such a manner that political masters cannot take undue
advantage. The primary responsibility of this commission is to lay down policy
guidelines for service oriented policing, evaluate the functioning of the police and
making binding recommendations to the government to that effect.
Second, the directives provide for a minimum fixed tenure of two years for the Chief
of Police and four other police officers on operational duties in the field. The court
expressed its shock over the frequent transfer of Superintendents of Police for
whimsical reasons and observed that this trend leads to demoralization of the police
force.
Third, the directives call for the separation of investigation from law and order which
was also recommended by the Law Commission of India in its 154th report. This
would ensure faster, accurate and fairer processes so that rule of law is maintained.
Presently, law and order is prioritized over investigation work which leads to loss of
material evidence crucial for the case under consideration.

Fourth, the Court's directive mandate the creation of a Police Establishment Board
which would be a departmental body to oversee the transfer and posting of the

officials above the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.

Fifth and the most important, the judgment directs to set up Police Complaints
Authority in states to inquire into allegations of complaint of public against the men
in uniform. This is supposed to be an independent body comprised of civil society
members to ensure that justice is done without prejudice to any party. However
states are trying to dilute the neutrality of the complaint authority by increasing the
number of policemen on the Complaint Authority in the guise of independent
members. This would annul the efficacy of having a complaint authority.
However, the states have been reluctant to implement the directives of the
Supreme Court. Most of the states have or are trying to pass the new Police Acts but
have diluted the directives leaving lacunae in place for police to act
discretionarily/arbitrarily and facilitating entrenchment by the political executive.
This is a significant blow to all civil society members who turn to state and the
police to protect their human rights. The entire campaign towards reform has been
compromised by those who want to protect their narrow and partisan interests.
The Supreme Court has set up a monitoring committee to review the
implementation of its directives.
The eighth report of the NPC recommended that protection available to the police
officers from prosecution under section 132 and 197 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure which mandate prior sanction of the government in order to prosecute
any public servant including police official for any act done in discharge of his
official duty be withdrawn or that a proviso be added to the section to initiate
automatic judicial enquiry in every refusal to prosecute. This recommendation must
be implemented. Making the police more accountable would deter police officials
from harassing citizens.
Structural and institutional changes can only bring in marginal improvements,what
is important is attitudinal change on both the police as well as people's side to
effectively cooperate with each other for smooth administration.
Go through the international and national statistical data in this, very important
-http://www.fdrindia.org/publications/IndianPoliceSystem_PR.pdf
AND http://bprd.nic.in/writereaddata/linkimages/1645442204-Volume%201.pdf
This post would like to conclude with the following thoughts for you to ponder over.
Corruption exists, is taken for granted, even celebrated. India is not truly free
because like slaves, majority of Indians passively accept injustice.Passive
acceptance of injustice is also violence. Disrespect is also violence. Laziness is also
violence. We unquestioningly accept injustices at home, on our streets, in our
workplaces and from those in public offices and it is us and only us who can change
this and make India a better place to live in. True patriotism lies in not just saluting
our national flag or standing up for the national anthem, we need to have a purpose
in our lives, if not for anyone else, for ourselves and our future generations. You get

back what you give. So, we should take all steps to make ourselves aware of our
rights and duties towards ourselves and the society for law and order and justice,as
well as make ourselves of the hierarchy of the police system as well as other public
organisations and use it effectively alongwith RTI in order to report non performance of duty of officials and reform them from our end as well.

Suppression of the people was the primary goal of law-enforcement agencies in

British times. Unfortunately, this tendency continues in independent India, where
the response to a conflict situation is to rush additional forces in, without any
attempt to resolve the underlying socio-economic conditions, says [B]K S
Subramanian[/B] in part 3 of his series

After the suppression of the 1857 revolt, the Government of India Act in 1858
provided a new framework for governance in India, which made the district
magistrate (DM), assisted by the superintendent of police, the kingpin of
governance at the district level. Though the British were fully aware of the failings
of the existing Indian police machinery, they chose not to reform it but
superimposed on it the centralised paramilitary police structure borrowed from the
Irish colonial experience (Arnold, 1986). In the 1860s a new legal structure was
created, consisting of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC)
and the Police Act. The powerful district magistrate-centric administration was
linked directly to the central government till the creation in 1937 of governments
at the provincial level.

The colonial penal and procedural codes, still in force, make it clear that
suppression of the people was the primary British goal after 1857 (Gupta, 1979).
The Indian Penal Code begins with chapters on criminal conspiracy and offences
against the state, as opposed to the common preoccupation of the police
everywhere with the prevention and detection of offences against person and
property. These find a place in the IPC only from Chapter XVI and Section 299. The
Code did not repeal obnoxious regulations of earlier times such as the Bengal
Regulation III 1818, used freely to deport leaders of the freedom struggle; the
offence of sedition was included in the Code in 1870.

In the CrPC, the chapters on security for keeping the peace and maintenance of
public order, including the use of force by the police and the military, take
precedence over provisions for the investigation and trial of criminal offences. In
the Police Act of 1861, priority is given to the collection of political intelligence.
The prevention and investigation of crime is included among the duties of the
police only in Section 23. The Act further provides for punitive policing at the cost
of the local population in the event of disturbances and for the appointment of
private persons as special police officers. Besides, police officers were vested
with vast powers and the lowest officer could arrest anyone and keep him in
confinement for at least 24 hours.

The development of an elaborate machinery for the collection and dissemination of

political intelligence was started in 1877 with the first manifestation of political
unrest following the formation of the Indian National Congress. Curzon made a
significant contribution by setting up the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the provincial
Special Branches on a systematic basis. These organisations were expanded and
became valuable to the government. They have continued well into independence
and the Congress and other governments at the centre and the states have found
them useful.

Briefly, after independence and the promulgation of a new Constitution, the basic
institutions of conflict management above the district level have been the state
and central governments. At the Centre, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), the
Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the Central Paramilitary Forces (CPFs) remain the key
institutions under the political executive. The development administrative
structure, after the initiation of planned development in 1952, was a
superimposition on the underlying regulatory structure. Maintenance of order has
been the prime priority of the Indian state during colonial and post-colonial
periods.

Law and order and police are state subjects in the Constitution of 1950. Political
intelligence collection has been a key aspect of police work in India. The governorgeneral/viceroy during colonial times and the prime minister after independence
have been in direct charge of the central Intelligence Bureau (IB), attached after
independence to the union home ministry. The state governments report
periodically to the central government on law and order. Units of the central IB,
deployed across the country, act as the eyes and ears of the central government.
The Central Paramilitary Forces (CPFs) at the disposal of the central government,
can be dispatched to the state governments at their request. The police machinery
in the states not only manages conflict situations on the ground but also collects

and interprets political and criminal intelligence. Intelligence units exist at several
levels of the police to do this job.

All the distinct elements in the police machinery including state police and
intelligence agencies, the central Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the Central
Paramilitary Forces (CPFs) are finally accountable to the union home ministry, the
nodal agency for conflict management.

The two large all-India services, the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and the
Indian Police Service (IPS), are recruited by the centre and deployed in the states
at crucial levels for conflict management. The IAS is under the control of the
ministry of personnel in New Delhi and the IPS is under the control of the union
home ministry for disciplinary purposes. While deployed in the states, however,
they work under the state governments. The director of the Intelligence Bureau
(DIB) and the union home secretary are key functionaries responsible for conflict
management at the central level.

The official discourse on national conflict management has ranged over a wide
terrain, with the participation of many distinguished administrative and police
officials. We focus here only on the contributions of a selected few at the top.

TCA Srinivasavaradan (1992), former union home secretary, who examined the
policy role of the union home ministry in dealing with social tensions, felt that the
available expertise at the bureaucratic level to understand, anticipate and
evaluate an intricate problem was inadequate and amateurish. The situation in
some cases was salvaged in the past because of the flexibility of the system, the
sagacity of the political leadership and its openness to information from all
quarters.

Srinivasavaradan noted that while the political response to conflict situations was
often based on a correct perception of the objective socio-economic conditions in
breeding and sustaining them, once the intensity of violence abated, the political
response took the administrative shape of deployment of central paramilitary
forces in the affected areas. Allegations of fake encounters, illegal arrests and
other misdeeds tended to be swept under the carpet. He added: In dealing with
problems of societal transition, excessive preoccupation with peace and order,
ignoring issues of law and justice, can prove expensive in the long run. Lack of

steadfastness of purpose is not desirable in dealing with basic nation-building

tasks. Thus, when issues with long-term implications came up, the traditional
responses of the union home ministry were found deficient. The ad-hocism and
amateurishness in the field could only be remedied by additional inputs of
knowledge, skill and vision through multidisciplinary research and policy analysis.

NN Vohra (1993), former union home secretary, in a detailed paper, examined

political violence during the 1980s and 1990s. He deplored the fact that the union
home ministry was often handled by inexperienced ministers; that union home
secretaries were often men with indifferent credentials to enhance the ministrys
internal capabilities and its influence over state governments. The requirements of
the police and intelligence organisations were not regularly assessed and provided
for in the annual budgets. The state governments had shown a declining concern
over internal security management, insisting that the union home ministry provide
assistance by way of armed police to meet the deteriorating law and order
situation. The union home ministry had failed to compel the states to be selfreliant in discharging their constitutional obligation to maintain internal security.
Since the 1980s, an increasing tendency was to augment the strength of the
central police forces (CPFs) in response to demands from the states for the
deployment of these forces. The Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) had a specific
mandate to provide assistance to state governments for internal security
management. The Assam Rifles (AR) has a similar mandate with regard to the
north-eastern region. Both these CPFs were of pre-1947 origin. Several new units
had come into existence after 1950: the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) in 1962,
the Border Security Force in 1965 and later the Central Industrial Security Force
(CISF). However, since the violence, which first arose in the Punjab region followed
by developments in J&K and the north-east, the union home ministry has been
compelled to deploy elements of all available CPFs for internal security duties even
at the cost of thinning their presence on the border areas: very large elements of
the BSF have remained deployed in the Punjab, J&K and the north-east. Significant
elements of the ITBP have been withdrawn from their border duties to perform
internal security duties in the plains. The CISF has also come in for such
deployment away from its duly allotted functions. The increasing deployment of
CPFs for duties across the country has led to a compromise on training standards,
affecting the morale and discipline of the forces.

Vohra noted the problem of the heavy transit through India of illicit drugs and
narcotics from the Golden Triangle in the north-east and Golden Crescent in the
north-west in a multi-billion-dollar drugs trade across the globe. Intelligence
networks had proved inadequate to meet the challenge.

In 1993, the investigations of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the
serial bomb blasts in Mumbai established the existence of strong criminal networks
with cross-border linkages. The scale of such activities, revealed in the
uncovering of scams and scandals, indicated that the functioning of political
parties and decision-making authorities were being subverted.

Vohra added that central ministries and agencies concerned with national security
management have failed to work in close coordination. The IB had still to be
provided a charter of duties and responsibilities together with its interface with
R&AW. The Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC), an apex body set up to collect,
collate and analyse intelligence from all agencies and draw up action plans had
become almost defunct. The agencies concerned were reluctant to share
intelligence with the JIC.

Raman (2005), additional secretary, cabinet secretariat, stated that India had a
full-time chairman of the JIC till the middle of 1997. Thereafter, the post remained
vacant till January 1999. The National Security Council (NSC) system based on the
US model was set up subsequently. The system is presided over by the prime
minister with important ministers of the cabinet, a national security adviser, a
strategic policy group (SPG); an NSC Secretariat (NSCS) and a National Security
Advisory Board (NSAB). The JIC became the NSC Secretariat. The NSAB prepared
the nuclear doctrine, the strategic defence review and the national security
review.

Madhav Godbole (1996; 2000; 2006), former union home secretary, examined the
apocalyptic act of violence and demolition on December 6, 1992 of the Babri
Masjid at Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh and highlighted the political crisis which led to
the union home ministrys lack of action despite the existence of adequate powers
under the Indian Constitution. He has left no one in doubt about the crisis of
inaction at the heart of the Indian political system, which again became evident
during the subsequent massacre of the minority Muslim community during the
Gujarat carnage 2002, the attacks on the Christian minority in different parts of
the country, and the Mumbai terrorist attacks in 2008.

These events highlight the failings of the union home ministry in dealing with
increasingly complicated conflict management situations in the country, which are
reflective of a deeper political crisis at the heart of the Indian political system.

[B]Selected References

[/B]

[*]Arnold, David (1986) [I] Police Power and Colonial Rule: Madras 1859-1947,[/I]
OUP, New Delhi[/*]
[*]Godbole, Madhav (1996) [I] Unfinished Innings,[/I] Orient Longman, New Delhi[/*]
[*]Godbole, Madhav (2000) [I] The Changing Times: A Commentary on Current
Affairs,[/I] Orient Longman,
New Delhi[/*]
[*]Godbole, Madhav (2006) [I] Ayodhya and Indias Mahabharat: Constitutional
Issues and Proprieties,[/I] Economic and Political Weekly, Mumbai, May 27)[/*]
[*]Gupta Anandswarup,
[/*]

1979 [I]The Police in British India[/I] (BPR&D, New Delhi)

[*]Raman, B (2005) [I] National Security Mechanism[/I],

[LINK=http://www.saag.org/papers,1228][U]http://www.saag.org/papers,1228[/U]
[/LINK]. html[/*]
[*]Srinivasavaradan, T.C.A
(1992) [I]Federal Concept: The Indian Experience,[/I]
Allied Publishers,
New Delhi[/*]
[*]Vohra N.N. (1997) [I] Is India under Threat: Growing Concerns about Indias
Internal Security,[/I] World Affairs, July-September, Vol. I (3)[/*]