Odisha police station fiasco: Questions in the aftermath

Separation of the investigating branch from regular police services is a prerequisite for reviving our crippled criminal justice system, writes Mohammad Wasim.

— 

"The law should not be seen to sit limbly, while those who defy it go free and those who seek its protection lose hope." Jennison versus Backer (1972 (1) All E.R. 1006)

ANY common citizen who has approached a police station to file a first information report (FIR) must have experienced a Kafkaesque impossibility in turning the bureaucratic machinery, a feeling of utter helplessness and dejection in the face of an impervious monolithic authority.

Whether the trial of the accused ever begins or not, the complainant is on trial the moment they decide to take recourse to the legal machinery. The trial in the head begins even before one enters a police station.

Recently, a couple as privileged as an army officer and his lawyer fiancée approached a police station in Bharatpur, Odisha to lodge an FIR and seek help against miscreants who had waylaid them at night. What was to follow at the police station was much worse. The woman was allegedly physically tortured and sexually assaulted.

It is possible the woman may have asserted enforcement of her rights and held the police personnel to their duty, but that is something every aware citizen ought to do.

Indeed, such torture and assault are not common at police stations, but refusal to register complaints or provide succour in any other manner is the order of the day. If one insists on the same, the least one has to experience is the uncomfortable glare of the police 'force'.

Contrast it with a recent story of a woman in California, Alequin who was reunited with her long-lost uncle, Luis Armando Albino. Based on an online DNA match that Alequin took "for fun" and some photographs, the police carried out an investigation in a case that had been long closed and reunited Luis Armando with his family after over 70 years.

Also read: Anti-rape litigation, implementation and the need for revision

It would have been easy to dismiss Alequin's information as a fantastical evocation of a disturbed mind, but the committed Oakland Police Department came forward to not only dutifully 'serve' the citizens, but did so with a deep sense of empathy.

Police force, not service

Why is our police force so obdurately reluctant to move into action? Because, in practice, it is still a police 'force' and not a 'service'. An institution baked in a colonial context has found it impossible to remould to the needs of a constitutional democracy.

The prodigious unresponsiveness of police administration, including abdication of duty under partisan pressure and delays in the criminal justice system, cripples justice delivery and disables relief to the citizens. More often than not corruption makes its slithering presence felt.

The corruption is so systemic and entrenched that ordinarily one has to pay a bribe to get an FIR registered, then again to put the investigation machinery into motion, possibly in one's own favour, and then, at the stage of filing of chargesheet, and so on.

It seems corruption is the grease of police investigative machinery, without which it suffers such wear and tear that the machine itself comes to a halt.

For people, police duty has largely meant crime prevention and investigation. And it is here that the lacuna is gaping.

Is such machinery, supported by our taxes, then needed if it refuses to fulfil our most basic security needs, i.e., a sense of security derived from the willingness shown by the police to deal with any emergent situation that threatens our well-being?

Does it not need to be completely overhauled? Of all the pre-Independence bureaucratic institutions, police machinery was the one that compulsorily needed to be shelved and rebuilt. It was the brute force of the police that carried the might of the British Empire on its shoulders; it was the immediate deterrent strong arm of the ruler that cajoled the local populace into submission.

Also read: How the State uses 'national security' to spellbind the process of justice

In turn, it drank from the nectar of the throne, it enjoyed first hand the perks and privileges that comes from their immediate contact with subjects, the ruled.

It was flawed to think such an institution could evolve. We may have some motivated personnel, particularly at upper levels, some sparks of brilliance and commitment in resolution of cases, but they are few and far between.

Not entirely their fault

Not that the police system does not serve any purpose. It has been largely successful in maintaining law and order, resolving cases when it has shown the will, and providing a basic structure for other police functions such as patrolling and traffic management.

Nor are its fatal shortcomings its faults only. It has been beset by undue political interference, infrastructural lacunae, stress from overburden, lack of motivation due to its bottom heavy nature etc., to list a few issues.

Not that it has not changed at all. With increasing literacy levels, intervention of the constitutional courts, the advent of social media, continued calls— both external and internal— for change etc., the responsiveness as well as cordiality of the police force has improved.

And yet, even now, seventy five years after Independence, it fails to fulfil our most basic expectation from a police force— to register a complaint or FIR, take immediate action to prevent the evil from continuing, erode a sense of premium on crime and radiate an impression of 'being there' for the victim. The police force needs to be remodelled into a police service while ingraining it with a deep sense of duty and empathy.

Committees for police reforms

Several committees with wide terms of reference have been constituted for police reforms, and these committees have done a laudable job in terms of reform recommendations which, if implemented, can usher in a police service suited to our democratic set-up. The recommendations have been in the nature of certain structural and institutional changes with the prime objective of increasing police autonomy and balancing their authority and accountability.

But these committees, including the National Police Commission (1977), Ribeiro Committee (1996) and Padmanabhaiah Committee (2000), to name a few, brought in their wake much talk and no work.

This is the reason why the Supreme Court, in its judgment of September 22, 2006 in Prakash Singh & Ors versus Union of India & Ors, observed: "It is not possible or proper to leave this matter only with an expression of this hope and to await developments further. It is essential to lay down guidelines to be operative till the new legislation is enacted by state governments."

Also read: Minorities, policing and the need for reform

Accordingly, the Supreme Court directed the Union and the state governments to undertake immediate steps for the following: 

1. Constitution of state security commissions.
2. Following the procedure for selection and minimum tenure of director general of police (DGP). 
3. Security of tenure for police officers on operational duties. 
4. Separation of investigation function from law and order.
5. Constitution of a police establishment board in each state. 
6. Establishment of state and district complaints authorities. 
7. Constitution of a National Security Commission. 

Thereafter, the second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC), in its report on public order, made a comprehensive recommendation for police reforms on similar lines, but no substantial measures have fructified on the ground.

Though all these recommendations are urgent and essential to truly transform our police establishment, the one recommendation that ought to be implemented right away is the separation of investigation from law and order, as non-separation is the source-spring of several fundamental evils besetting our police functioning and criminal justice system.

Apathetic attitude towards citizens, refusal to file FIRs, lack of professional expertise and forensic laboratories for investigation, consequent tardy and shoddy investigation and the complex interplay between corruption and political interference put together a bleakhouse of a criminal justice system, the lack of faith in which is deleterious for the very peace and prosperity of our nation.

Lawlessness breeds further lawlessness. A society that does not effectively deal with crime propagates insecurity among law-abiding citizens and encourages criminals.

It breeds an impression that crime pays and there are no adverse consequences. In a patriarchal setup, it radiates the much-desired strength and power in the person of a criminal, who is to be emulated. Thus, more individuals are sucked into an ever-widening gyre of crime.

Also read: No judge should be afraid to grant bail

In some cases, local gangs and violence become the norm, which stifles the space of law-abiding productive citizens, thereby impacting the very social and economic well-being of the society.

Board of investigation

The second ARC recommended separation of investigation from other police functions, and collated it with forensic and prosecution departments under a board of investigation at the state level, to effectuate an efficient and responsive police service as well as a coherent and robust criminal justice system, which of course shall coordinate with other police establishments.

There is one aspect that these committees as well as other general and particular committees on bureaucratic reforms fail to emphasise— designing and implementing corresponding degrees or certificate programmes catering to the specialised skills that are prerequisites to give wings to the recommended measures. Hence, any measure for bureaucratic reforms must integrate degrees with corresponding skill sets in university curricula.

Though a police 'service' is the most basic need of citizens and though these reforms are urgently needed, it has been the leshy of our criminal justice system. Citizens, civil society and conscientious politicians ought to come together in earnest and with great vigour to materialise this ever-elusive rightful hope of ours.