The virtual clean chit to one side of the protesters raises extremely dangerous and political portents for the policing institution and the nation

The police ought to be the natural, visible and trusted representative of the Government to immediately address any concern or perceived danger by the citizenry. Personnel are expected to be accessible, unbiased and positively interventionist to address any crisis. Maintenance of “law and order” is their foremost function. In a wounded and increasingly polarised society like India, where the societal faultlines and suspicions run deep, it is only the supposedly apolitical and “independent” institutions like the police that can theoretically rein in violent tempers, passion and hatred unleashed by those who have vested interest in keeping the societal pot boiling. From controlling secessionist movements, insurgencies, civic/communal riots, vandalism, traffic, mob control, theft, crime etc — the laundry list of policing duties is unforgivingly long. Many individuals from the policing forces across the country have distinguished themselves with supreme courage, conduct and dignity to uphold the lofty motto of Satyameva Jayate (Truth alone Triumphs). However, collectively the institutional image of the police in the public consciousness is far from the desired levels of probity, independence and empathic moorings.

Over the last few decades, the spectre of communal riots in 1984, 2002 or even the latest communal riots in February in Delhi, have raised serious questions about the institution’s conduct. Almost always, the standard concerns of partisan preferences, apathetic behaviour, dilly-dallying and capitulation have dominated the post-mortem of each of these strifes with all ruling national and State parties guilty of complicity in the same, whenever in power. The convenience, lure and utility of a beholden police force make for incalculable comfort for those in power, who ensure that the plethora of police reform committee reports over the years continues gathering dust. Various reform committees, led by Prakash Singh, Soli Sorabjee, VA Malimath, K Padmanabhaiah and JF Ribeiro, have attempted to professionalise and rescue the institution from the clutches of vested interests, but barring minor changes triggered by the Supreme Court’s intervention, the essential narrative and outcome remain the same.

The recent 17,000-page chargesheet by the Delhi Police, that has named 15 people under the sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, of the Indian Penal Code and Arms Act, has re-ignited the debate of institutional credibility. The father of the “All-India Administrative Services” (of which the Indian Police Service is an integral part), Sardar Patel, famously said, “…these people are the instrument. Remove them and I see nothing, but a picture of chaos all over the country.” While the policing institution was certainly not removed, it did not live up to the expectations as the larger picture of civic chaos, corruption and deteriorating law and order is attributable, to an extent, on its conduct.

Already the harsher insurgencies have been essentially outsourced by the State Police to the Indian Army or to the Central Armed Police Forces. The frequency at which the Army is requisitioned to conduct flag-marches, control civic disorder or handle natural disasters does not show the State Police forces in a glowing light.

The significance of Delhi in the national imagination, owing to its status as the capital of the nation, makes Delhi Police the cynosure of administrative efficacy. From the offices of the Central Government, Supreme Court, foreign embassies, multilateral organisations to the sprawling metropolis of 17 million residents — the responsibility and privilege of maintaining Shanti Sewa Nyaya (Peace, Service, Justice) is on the largest metropolitan police service in the world. Despite over 80,000 personnel, Delhi Police is clearly overstretched with over 25 per cent of its staff committed to VIP duties and securing large-scale events that are typical to any capital city — leaving too few, to handle the restive city effectively. It has the unwanted distinction of having the maximum number of complaints registered against its own personnel. Frequent accusations of inaction, corruption and even collusion further mar the perception. The institutional rifts within were apparent from a very public and embarrassing siege of its headquarters by thousands of police personnel revolting and complaining against their own senior officers last year. The oddity of Delhi Police coming under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Home Affairs, as opposed to the elected Delhi Government, has been a constant bone of contention for successive regimes. The implied concern is the plausible political influence exerted on the Delhi Police by the Central Government. While there are good functional reasons for this, as is done in major metropolitan police forces of global capitals, the concerns of undue political influence are increasingly hard to ignore.

Irrespective of the Governments in power, the narrative has been disconcerting. The Delhi High Court had noted about the 1984 riots, “Though we boast of being the world’s largest democracy and Delhi being its national Capital, the sheer mention of the incidents of 1984 anti-Sikh riots in general and the role played by Delhi Police and state machinery in particular makes our heads hang in shame in the eyes of the world polity.” It is that lingering sentiment of kowtowing to the powers-that-be that has again sullied the optics accompanying the chargesheet pertaining to the Delhi riots. Indeed, the perpetrators and instigators of such violence are rarely one-sided, but the posited optics of a virtual clean chit to one side of the protesters raises extremely dangerous and political portents for the policing institution, as also for the nation. Importantly, the Commissioner of Delhi Police has clarified that they, “had questioned persons without regard to their religion and party affiliation.” Yet some hard data continues fanning concerns. Delhi Police’s recent campaign of Dil ki Police (Police with Heart) — with a heart replacing the ‘o’ in Police — has to go beyond slick slogans and denials as the chargesheet could have reflected a more nuanced diversity of purported arsonists. Now, eyes are on Delhi Police to uphold Shanti Sewa Nyaya, “without regard to religion and party affiliation” as was confirmed by its Commissioner.

 (The writer, a military veteran, is a former Lt Governor of Andaman & Nicobar Islands)