The recent directions of the Supreme Court (SC) on the safety of women and children in Delhi-NCR deserve to be seen not merely as another set of judicial orders, but as an opportunity to examine how preventive policing can work more effectively on the ground.
The court has called for vulnerability mapping, strengthened patrolling, designated responsibility for vulnerable locations, and audits of lighting and CCTV in parks and other public spaces. It has also emphasised measurable action, with responsibility and accountability fixed on those entrusted with prevention of crime and the protection of vulnerable persons.
The immediate question for Delhi’s leadership is therefore: How can these directions be implemented forthwith and sustained beyond the immediate compliance period?
Start with manpower assessment
Delhi Police leadership must begin not with a request for more personnel, but with an assessment of where the officers already available are deployed.
As of March 12, 2026, the Delhi Police had 97,331 sanctioned posts and 14,140 vacancies, including 13,958 vacancies from the constable to inspector level. These are the ranks most directly connected with field policing. There is therefore a genuine vacancy problem. But there is also a deployment question.
Every territorial police station could immediately undergo a manpower and deployment audit. A CAG audit had earlier found a 35% manpower shortage in the 72 police stations examined, with a greater shortfall in active duties than static duties. It also found instances where personnel were deployed at district or sub-divisional headquarters while police stations remained short-staffed.
{{/usCountry}}Every territorial police station could immediately undergo a manpower and deployment audit. A CAG audit had earlier found a 35% manpower shortage in the 72 police stations examined, with a greater shortfall in active duties than static duties. It also found instances where personnel were deployed at district or sub-divisional headquarters while police stations remained short-staffed.
{{/usCountry}}Deploy according to risk
The court has directed district-wise vulnerability mapping using crime patterns, complaints, local intelligence and other relevant information. Identified parks and vulnerable areas are to receive appropriate patrolling and security arrangements, particularly during periods identified through vulnerability assessments, with designated responsibility for identified locations.
The principle could be simple: the right police presence at the right place and at the right time. If a particular park becomes vulnerable during evening hours, policing should reflect that risk. If another location presents greater risk early in the morning, deployment should follow the evidence.
Fill vacancies, but intelligently
The 14,140 sanctioned vacancies, particularly those at the constable-to-inspector level, represent a significant opportunity to strengthen field policing. But recruitment alone should not be regarded as reform. New personnel should be allocated according to the station-wise workloads and vulnerability assessments. The objective should be not simply to fill posts, but to put policing capacity where it is most needed.
Determine whether additional posts are actually required
A study should be taken up on police workload and preventive deployment, considering the resident population and floating population, crime and complaint workload, investigation requirements, vulnerable locations, patrol hours, emergency response, night-time activity, public-order duties, security requirements and geography.
Only after this exercise should Delhi determine whether additional sanctioned posts are required, and if so, how many and where. This would replace a general demand for more manpower with an evidence-based assessment of actual policing requirements.
Common governance mechanism
Policing alone cannot make public spaces safe. Infrastructure like lighting and parks falls under separate agencies. Citizens see one public space, not departmental boundaries, requiring a unified governance mechanism.
Under the Lieutenant Governor, the chief secretary should coordinate safety efforts alongside the police commissioner and key agencies (DDA, MCD, NDMC, PWD).
The principle should be clear: the police identify the safety risk; the agency owning the asset corrects the physical deficiency; a named officer owns the action; and the common system tracks and verifies completion.
Every vulnerable spot should feature a digital record tracking its risk status, police deployment, lighting, CCTV function, assigned officer, and repair deadlines.
Learn from every serious incident
Every serious crime in a public place could trigger a “could this have been prevented?” review. The criminal investigation would establish who committed the offence, while the preventive review would examine prior complaints, known vulnerabilities, functioning of lighting and surveillance, prescribed patrolling and whether available preventive measures could have reduced the risk.
There should also be an antecedent and bail-status review where the arrested suspect has previous criminal cases or is already on bail. The investigating officer should verify the cases and bail conditions and place the information before the prosecution and appropriate court. Where legally sustainable grounds exist, the prosecution should seek cancellation of bail. Where bond-forfeiture requirements are met, the applicable provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita should be invoked through the court.
This should become a standard part of serious-offence reviews—not an action dependent on individual initiative. Prevention, therefore, should follow both the place and the person.
Immediate opportunity
The immediate four-week exercise could produce tangible outcomes: district-wise vulnerability maps, police-station manpower audits, a time-bound vacancy-filling plan, patrol arrangements, infrastructure rectification and measurable preventive-policing indicators.
The strategy is simple: Deploy better, fill vacancies, measure workloads, and add manpower where needed.
Delhi’s residents deserve visible, responsive policing, not paper assurances. With the Supreme Court’s mandate, Delhi must build a lasting preventive system. Citizens shouldn’t ask where police are—authorities should already know where citizens are vulnerable and who is responsible for fixing it.
(Based on inputs from several colleagues in Delhi Police)
kiranbediofficial@gmail.com
(The writer, India’s first female IPS officer, is former lieutenant governor of Puducherry)