Abuse of police power in Indian democracy!

By M.Y.Siddiqui

The problem of abuse of police power in Indian democracy arises from the colonial Police Act 1861, the primary governing law to date, designed by the British to create a force subservient to the executive (government) rather than the people. It is in this context that in the world’s largest democracy, the abuse of police power remains a critical challenge to civil liberties and the rule of law. It suits the government using police power as a tool of suppression, oppression, state terror, weaponisation of dissent and vendetta politics against the public at large. It also exhibits the spectacular might of the government. While the Constitution of India guarantees fundamental rights to all citizens, systemic issues ranging from political interference to colonial era legal frameworks frequently lead to instances of police brutality, wrongful arrests and custodial violence.

Common forms of abuse include custodial violence and torture, extrajudicial killings (encounters), arbitrary and unlawful arrests, suppression of dissents, corruption and extortion. Custodial violence results in third degree torture to extract confessions under duress at times results in custodial deaths. Extrajudicial killings (encounters), where police outside the legal trial process kills suspects, are often justified as self-defense during an escape attempt. An estimated 60 percent arrests in India, according to various social research organisations, are unnecessary or unjustified, often used to intimidate political opponents or settle personal vendettas. Above all, excessive use of force, including lathi charges and tear gas, is frequently used to disperse peaceful protests like CAA, NRC or Farmers’ protests. Besides, everyday interactions with the police often involve demands for bribes for basic services like filing a First Information Report(FIR), or settling traffic violations.

Root causes for abuse of police power are colonial legacy, political power’s vested interest like political interference. Ministers often use the police for personal or political gains, leading to biased investigations, and a lack of professional autonomy. There are structural deficiencies as well. Always, the vacancies rate is around 24 percent, inadequate training that contributes to a stressed, overworked force that may resort to violence out of frustration. Police also enjoys culture of impunity with low conviction rates for officers accused of misconduct, mostly due to internal investigations by their own departments, emboldening continuing abuse. With the absolute power come unfathomable corruptions in police.

Police corruption manifests through bribes for investigation inaction, falsified evidence, and “hafta” (regular payments) protection money against prosecution. Factors contributing to corruption include, low remuneration, long working hours, immense political pressure, and inadequate training. A 2023 survey by a social research organization revealed 38 percent of people paid bribes, with traffic violations 45 percent, and FIR registration 32 percent being the most common interactions, averaging rupees 4,200 crores. Petty corruption in the police force is estimated at 4,000 crores annually. In addition, police corruption often stems from a lack of public accountability and an organizational culture that has remained unchanged since 1861. Currently, police enjoys almost the highest possible public trust deficit, according to various social research organisations and academic reports.

In the scheme of the Constitution of India and the rules of law thereunder, victims of police abuse have several legal avenues for seeking justice. There are constitutional writs under Article 32 before the Supreme Court or Article 226 before the High Court, wherein citizens can file writ petitions for violations of their fundamental rights like the Right to Life and Liberty (Article 21). There are also statutory bodies wherein complaints can be filed in the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) or State Human rights Commissions, which investigates custodial deaths and illegal detentions, penalize culprit police persons and provide compensations to the victims’ kin. The problem arises out of the police personnel manning investigation wings of Human Rights Commissions. Because of fraternal complicity, investigation by police against police generally is biased and the alleged culprit police personnel are let off.

There are judicial safeguards as well. The Supreme Court’s landmark D.K.Basu guidelines (1997) mandate strict procedures during arrests, including the right to inform a relative and have a medical examination. But these Guidelines are violated generally with impunity under the current electoral fascism. There are also provisions in the BNS derived from the replaced Indian Penal Code under which police personnel can be prosecuted for causing hurt to extort confessions or wrongful confinement.

Police force handles cases of corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, with reforms often suggesting improved training, transparent promotions, and technology to reduce direct human interaction. While efforts are made to combat this, the deeply rooted nature of the issue requires comprehensive reforms in the police structure to ensure accountability and integrity. There is a strong need for reforms to ensure the police functions as a service rather than a force, including setting up an independent complaint authority and separating investigation from law and order duties. Utilising technology for processes like filing FIRs and monitoring police activities can reduce the scope for corruption. It is relevant here to mention that installation of surveillance cameras in police stations have not worked at all to curb corruption as the police across the country have resorted to third party conduit or channel for all their corrupt deals!

Powered by Froala Editor