A STUDY of comparative information (1999 to 2003) furnished by the Bureau of Police Research and Development regarding complaints received against policemen and their disposal shows that:
(i) number of complaints continued to drop from 1999 to 2002 and showed a rise only in 2003 (perhaps on account of the setting up of the Human Rights Commissions),
(ii) in 2003 as many as 46.8 per cent complaints were found to be false/ unsubstantiated,
(iii) departmental inquiries were made into only about 27.5 per cent cases in 2003 in which 20,321 personnel were involved. Departmental proceedings were completed against 9527 police personnel and only 835 officials (8.7 per cent) were dismissed/ removed from service. Major penalty was imposed against 4762 officials and minor on 15,967 officials,
(iv) 1216 police personnel were sent up for trial in 2003, cases against 146 were withdrawn, trial was completed against 176 and only 45 were convicted.
An effective mechanism for redress of public complaints is not available to citizens at present. Few persons decide to complain against policemen as it is widely believed that such an effort is of no use since prompt, just and effective action is rarely taken. A culture of denial pervades the department and (even) superior police officers try to whitewash the guilt of their subordinates. Though the Human Rights Commissions have been set up at the national and state levels, the infrastructural facilities available with them are far too inadequate to make them even slightly effective. Most of the complaints made to them are referred back to the department and reach a dead end.
Policemen are recruited from contemporary society and reflect its strengths and weaknesses. The society is slowly getting transformed and the mores of conduct acceptable in public life have undergone a marked change.
{{/usCountry}}Policemen are recruited from contemporary society and reflect its strengths and weaknesses. The society is slowly getting transformed and the mores of conduct acceptable in public life have undergone a marked change.
{{/usCountry}}Perhaps an example would clearly bring out this change. HG Mudgal was a Member of (Interim) Parliament from Bombay. He belonged to the Congress. In the last week of March 1951, the then Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru got information that Mudgal had obtained some money from the Bombay Bullion Association for canvassing support for them. The PM immediately took action to get the information checked. As the allegation was reported to be correct, he, on June 8, moved a motion before Parliament asking for constitution of a parliamentary committee to look into the matter. The committee submitted its report to the Speaker on July 26.
After debating the report at length, Parliament came to the conclusion that Mudgal's conduct was unbecoming of an MP. He offered to resign, but this was not accepted and he was expelled from Parliament on September 23.
The whole episode was over in less than six months. There were no protestations that Mudgal could not be deemed to be guilty till he was convicted by a court. If the framers of our Constitution were to come alive, they would be aghast to find serving Chief Ministers of States (and ministers in the Union Government) facing trials before criminal courts on grave charges involving moral turpitude against all norms of decency and propriety.
Crime, by itself, is no longer looked upon as bad. What is considered bad now is being caught and being brought to book. Influential, resourceful and well-connected persons behave as if they are not subject to the law of the land. This corrosion in public morality also gets reflected in increased police criminality.
Many police officers have faced situations in which even responsible and well-informed citizens did not hesitate to pressure the police to use third degree methods to work out a case reported by them. The very nature of their duties makes the policemen spend a major portion of their working time in close proximity of crime and criminals. Such continuous and prolonged exposure makes them all the more susceptible to criminal activities.
Long spells of duty in hostile conditions (away from their families), abysmal living conditions, having to face high-tech militants and Naxalities possessing far superior weaponry and lethal explosives and the sheer impracticability of maintaining a state of 'high alert' with grossly inadequate numbers add up to a 'pressure cooker' syndrome in which policemen are just waiting to explode at the slightest pretext.
Since police criminality is rooted in the overall pattern of illegality of police work as a consequence of its politicisation and its control by the executive, the covert (more often than not oral) and illegal interference in day-to-day police work must end. Clear lines of responsibility and accountability need to be drawn between the police chief and the government. An internal system of effective control needs to be put in place. The National Police Commission had recommended that independent and representative police performance boards should be set up at the national and state levels to remove the scope for arbitrariness in evaluation of performance of policemen. An independent 'oversight mechanism” should also be established to promptly handle complaints against police misconduct.
Northern Ireland's Police Ombudsman and the independent Police Investigation Commission of UK could be taken as models.
It is very heartening that the Prime Minister himself endorsed the setting up of these bodies. Even with these mechanisms in place, police criminality would not be entirely eliminated but would certainly be reduced very substantially.