Bhopal: Describing as best the report of the Bihar Police Commission, 1961, Prof. Ajay Kumar Mehra, the renowned political scientist, has said that it dealt with several issues of importance to the police system. These included police regulation, employee rules, police training and police administration. Stressing the need for organisational performance and accountability, he noted that the UP’s chief minister, Yogi Adityanath initiated some reforms to face the challenges of the rule of law. But, some of the actions of the police drew criticism also. Police role in the Bhima Koregaon close to Pune district of Maharashtra, was such a case. In the same vein, he also stated that police action was taken on the instructions of the chief minister. He disagreed with Yogi Adityanath’s blanket order “Aparadhiyon Ko Thok Diya Jayega” (Criminals will be liquidated). He said that this could not be done under the Constitution. He cited another illustration in which mafia-turned politician Atiq Ahmad was gunned down by assailants while being taken to the hospital in police custody.
Prof. Mehra also disapproved of the action of bulldozing houses on one pretext or the other. Citing the case of BJP’s Tejinder Pal Singh Begga in which Punjab police team went to his residence in Delhi to arrest him, but was stopped by the Haryana police at Kurukshetra while being taken to Punjab, he said that this was a classic example of the politicisation of police. Police should not be used to sub-serve political ends. Emphasising the need for setting up micro-level police stations, he batted for police reforms at that level. Past couple of decades had witnessed complete end of the reform debate. Politicisation, sectarianisation and misuse of police since 2014 had reached new heights, he opined.
The above observations were made in an online lecture on “Indian Police beyond the reform debate” delivered by Prof. Ajay Kumar Mehra. The lecture was organised by the Institute of Objective Studies (IOS), New Delhi.
Delivering the lecture, Prof. Mehra observed that police reform had been his major area of interest and he had done a lot of research on the subject. He said that the modern police system was a vestige of our colonial past and the reform in it was missing from the public perspective. Reform in government organisations was a perennial process. Yet, the debate on reforms in the Indian police, which was organised in its present form in 1861 through the Indian Police Act passed by the British Parliament in popular perception, began with the constitution by the first National Police Commission chaired by Dharam Vira in 1980. It may be recalled that Vira was an ex-top bureaucrat who also served as the governor of West Bengal. By and large, people might not be aware that M.S. Gore Committee on Police Training was constituted in 1971-73. It was supposed to have picked up pace following the filing of a PIL by Prakash Singh, IPS (retired), N.K. Singh, IPS (retired) and H.D. Shourie, IAS (retired) in the Supreme Court to direct the government to initiate the process of police reforms, he commented.
Judgement on PIL
Prof. Mehra maintained that the judgement on the PIL came a decade later when in 2006 the apex court directed the Government of India to take up steps for police reforms. Since then, four committees were constituted. These were (1) Ribeiro Committee on Police Reforms (1998); (2) Padmanabhaiah Committee on Police Reforms (2000); (3) Group of Ministers on National Security (2000-01) and (4) Malimath Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System (2001-03). He said that the first ever Police Commission was constituted by the Government of United Provinces (Uttar Pradesh) in 1947, which submitted its report in 1948. Since the Constitution of India put police and public order in the state list, it was left to the states to undertake the responsibility. Most of the 14 states after the reorganisation constituted police commission during the 1960s and 1970s. But neither had they generated much debate, nor did much reform take place in any state. The debate in reality began when the Morarji Desai – led Janata government (1977-79) constituted Dharam Vira Commission and the country witnessed an all-India police strike in 1979. There was some mindset and the debate on police reforms should be looked at from that point of view. He noted that prior to the enactment of the law by the British parliament; rules made during the period of the Mughal Emperor Shah Alam-II were in force as far as the police functioning was concerned. Police as a law-and-order machinery was recognised after the adoption of the Constitution of India in 1947, he added.
Prof. Mehra remarked that the Janata government was of the opinion that the police had been a tool at the hands of the government. Hence, the need for police reforms keeping in mind the public perception. Referring to the current police establishment, he said that there were charges of corruption against it. It was also true that today the police was placed in a conflict zone due to spurt in the incidence of violence in the North-East and the menace of Naxalism. During the British Raj, police was not created to protect people, but to strengthen district magistrates. In order to reform the police system, the Indian Police Commission of 1902-03, also known as the Frazer Commission, was established by the British government. The Commission was headed by Sir Andrew Frazer and Lord Curzon, and its main goal was to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the police force in India. Among other things, the Commission recommended a separate training centre for officers and constables. He said that the police reforms commenced with the first police commission, set up soon after the 1857 revolt. Warren Hastings had been credited with initially initiating police reforms, which later took the shape of the Police Act of 1861, upon which the current police system was based, he noted.
Commenting on the Padmanabhaiah Committee on police reforms, Prof. Mehra said that it was set up by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. In addition to the Chairman, a former Union Home Secretary, the committee consisted of four members, who were all policemen, two retired and two serving. The committee did not have any representation from other section of society or public. The report was submitted by the committee to the Central government in October 2000. He held that the Committee was given too wide a task to be completed in too short a period. It had 12 broad terms of reference, one of which done consisted of 11 specific items. They covered almost all important problems faced as well as caused by the police. He said that the Ribeiro Committee Reforms (1998) was public interest litigation on police reforms. The committee recommended the setting up of Police Performance and Accountability Commissions at the state level and also the constitution of a District Complaints Authority, replacement of the Police Act, 1861 with a new act, he added.
Contextualising of police was defective
Meanwhile, presiding over the lecture, the secretary general of the IOS, Prof. Z. M. Khan, said that he too belonged to a police family. He held that contextualising of police in India was defective. Since police was a state subject, a lot of differences were bound to occur in eastern and western parts of Uttar Pradesh. NGOs were doing the work of reforms in this area as well. He opined that if police system was weak, it might be politicised. Thus, the area needed to be looked at from that angel too. He observed that the police system could improve if digitisation crept into it. Referring to the living conditions of police personnel, he said that their families lived in barracks. Their living conditions should be improved. Urging the NGOs to take up the issue of police reforms, he said the IOS was one of them to do research on the subject. He also laid stress on more funding for police establishment and reforms for better policing.
Earlier, introducing the topic and the speaker, the assistant secretary general of the IOS Prof. Haseena Hashia revealed that Prof. Mehra was a political scientist by training. He retired in December 2018 as principal of Shaheed Bhagat Singh Evening College, Delhi University. He taught political science at Delhi University for more than three decades. She said that during 2008, he held Ford Foundation professional chair at Dr. K.R. Narayanan Centre for Dalit and Minorities Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia. He was also Atal Bihari Vajpayee Senior Fellow at the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library during 2019-21 for the study of Prime Ministers of India. Here utilised this period in studying ‘Indian prime ministers: leadership, profiles and institutional transformation’. Besides, he had been a fellow at the University of Maryland, USA for six months in 1991. He was visiting professor at the Maison des sciences de l’homme, Paris in 2002, 2003, 2006, 2008 and 2011, 2012 and 2013. He was a member of the expert group on Diversity Index (2008; chair Prof. Amitabh Kundu, JNU), ministry of minority affairs, Government of India.
Further Prof. Hashia said that Prof. Mehra was a member of the Task Force on Criminal Justice, National Security and Centre-State Cooperation. He had also been associated in various advisory capacities with the Jagaran Lake City University, Bhopal, she said. Briefly highlighting the activities of the IOS, she noted that established in 1986, the Institute had successfully completed 35 years of its existence with steady progress and fruitful results from the endeavours as a non-political and non-profit organisation. The institute received recognition nationally and internationally for promoting research and conducting surveys on topical themes, publishing books and journals in areas of national concern, and pressing challenges of civil society, awarding scholarships to meritorious university students, besides actively participating in social welfare, educational and management fields, she added.
At the outset, the lecture began with the recitation of a Quranic verse by Hafiz Athar Husain Nadwi.
| 
