The caged parrot

 

For many in India, policing conjures up images of sloth, rudeness, potbelly, corruption and unkempt Khaki. On the other hand, the police officers feel that the depiction is unfair – they are actually overworked, underpaid and subject to whimsical and abrupt transfers that prevent them from knowing the neighbourhoods under their watch. However, everyone on both sides of the divide agree that Policing in India needs serious reforms and urgently. 

Policing is a state subject and the Police in India has been governed by an archaic Police Act of 1861 which envisaged abject fealty of the Police to the rulers. 11 states set up state police commissions led by Kerala in 1959, the latest being in 1984 by Andhra Pradesh, to bring about reforms in policing. Reports of these commissions gathered dust in their respective states. At the national level, the Central government set up the National Police Commission in 1977 with ex–Governor, Dharam Vira as Chairman and comprising four other extremely eminent members. This Commission did ground–breaking work and submitted eight reports between 1979 and 1981 covering all aspects of policing. These reports were outstanding, comprehensive, earth–shaking – and ignored. The Commission also produced a model Police Act to replace the Act of 1861 and that too was ignored.

 

In 1996, Mr. Prakash Singh, a celebrated Police officer who had been DGP of Assam and UP and DG, BSF, along with others, moved a writ petition in the Supreme Court to issue directions to the government to frame a new Police Act on the lines of the model Act drafted by the National Police Commission in order to ensure that the police is made accountable essentially and primarily to the law of the land and the people. Mr. Prashant Bhushan represented the petitioners. After 10 long years, on September 22, 2006, the division bench of Justices Sabharwal, Thakker and Balasubramanyan of the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgement [case no. 310 of Prakash Singh and Ors vs Union of India and Ors] which promised to radically change the face of policing and, by extension, governance in India.

 

The Supreme Court gave seven directions: (i) Constitute a State Security Commission fairly independent of the political executive which will insulate the police from undue interference, (ii) Transparent, merit–based process of appointing the DGP and giving him a two – year tenure, (iii) Two – year tenure for Zonal IG, Range DIG, SP of district and SHO, (iv) Separate Investigation wing from Law & Order wing, (v) Set up a Police Establishment Board consisting of DGP and four other senior police officers to decide transfers, postings and other service related matters up to the rank of Dy. S.P. and recommend regarding posting and transfers for higher ranks, (vi) Set up Police Complaints Authority to inquire into serious complaints against Police, and (vii) Set up a National Security Commission for selection of chiefs of Central Police Organisations with a minimum tenure of two years.

 

Essentially, what the Supreme Court sought to do was to make Policing and the Police administration autonomous, with loyalty only to the law of the land. India has had an encouraging history of autonomous institutions delivering well. Even officials steeped in a lifetime of wheeling and dealing because of job exigencies and ethos have developed a spine the moment their autonomy has been ensured. The autonomous institution of the Election Commission produced a T.N. Seshan who changed the election landscape of the country into something which is the envy of even the most advanced democracies. The Union Public Service Commission has continued to select the best and the brightest without fear or favour or corruption. Some of the Comptrollers and Auditor Generals have done stellar work and refused to bow down before the might of the Executive. In fits and starts, the higher Judiciary has delivered.

 

It took 10 years after the petition for the judgement. It has been another 17 years since then. Has anything changed? It has, for the worse. The judgement shook not only the political establishment but also the civil administration across the country. Almost all states entered impassioned objections to the Supreme Court ruling. Each single state tried to first resist it, then to delay and then to find inventive ways to circumvent.

 

The first weapon in the arsenal of the government/s was to represent that Policing was a state subject so it was up to the states. To my mind, this logic was spurious. However, even if it had merit, the Centre did not pass a Police Act for Delhi where the Police comes directly under it. After follow-through by the Supreme Court, so far, only 18 out of the 28 states have passed new Acts; there has been no new Police Act for the Union Territories. Most of the new Acts make one hanker for the old 1861 Act.

 

On paper, this is how things stand as of 2021 till which detailed inputs are available. State Security Commissions have been set up for all the states and Union Territories except Odisha. Only five states have allowed shortlisting of candidates for the post of DGP by the UPSC and six states accorded her/him a minimum 2-year tenure. 17 states  and the Union Territory of Delhi have provided for minimum tenures of two years for key personnel. Only one state, Mizoram, made a serious attempt at separating the investigation wing and the law and order wing. All the states have set up Police Establishment Boards. Barring three states and the remaining Union Territories, all the other states and Delhi have constituted Police Complaints Authorities. National Security Commission has not been set up.

 

Is it a mixed bag then? No, no, a thousand times NO. It’s way worse than before the Supreme Court judgement if one looks at the real picture.

 

While states have set up State Security Commissions, some have omitted and some have “forgotten” to include the leader of the Opposition and/ or the judicial member. While, as per the Supreme Court directive, the official members of the Commission should be a minority, many of the Commissions are predominated by the official appointees. Barring Karnataka, none of the states has made the recommendation of the Commission binding. Even the requirement to submit an annual report to the Assembly has been done away with except in nine states. So these Commissions have only one function – produce a few reports which are never read by anyone and are consigned to the dustbins, or, even worse in bureaucratese, “FILED!”. Responsibility without any real power – prerogative of the eunuchs through the ages.

 

That all-important matter of insulating the DGP, the head of the police force, from political interference – well, it didn’t happen. All that the Supreme Court order achieved was legitimising wrongful action by the state governments. They started appointing officers just before their retirement and giving them two-year tenures on the pretext of the Supreme Court order. Either pliable officers were found for this or their pliability was ensured because of the lure of having their service careers extended by two years. The Supreme Court wised up to it very late and ordered that such officers must have at least six months’ tenure remaining. That led to states appointing officers holding “temporary charge” of DGPs in perpetuity. The Supreme Court mandated that the DGP can be removed from the post within two years only on three grounds, indiscipline, conviction and incapacitation. However, many states have included “convenient” phrases like “on other administrative grounds,” “in public interest,” etc. as grounds for removal and this has made a mockery of the two-year tenure provision. At least two of my batchmates were summarily removed from the DGP posts on such ambiguous grounds.

 

None of the states is inclined to implement two – year – tenure for other operational officers, Zonal IGP, Range DIG and so on. Police Acts of some states provide that the tenure would be “generally” or “normally” two years. Further, words like “in public interest,” “any other contingency,” etc. as grounds for removal render the minimum tenure bit meaningless. The transfers have become so frequent that at a certain stage of my career, every day, while boarding the staff car in the morning to go to office, I used to check up WhatsApp as to where I was posted that day and then instruct the driver accordingly. Once I searched for three days for the office where I was posted before realising that the office didn’t exist. In the next posting, a traffic sergeant performing duty 10 feet away didn’t know the existence of the office – it was that insignificant.

 

On ground, investigation has not been separated from Law & Order although some states have passed executive orders with riders. A senior IPS officer of UP carried out a time-and-motion study and found that investigation is devoted some point zero zero something percentage of a Police officer’s work–time while that is supposed to be her/his main task. The issue appears to be manpower provisioning. What will it cost a ruling dispensation to treble the police force one day? What might be the benefit? Tremendous. But the benefits will come three to five years, hence. Political view span in India – one to two years of effective government, rest of five years in trumpeting it and preparing for the next election.

 

Police Establishment Boards (PEBs) were mandated to consist of only Police officers so that Police internal administration is insulated from extraneous influences and pressures. Instead, some states have included others. PEBs were to decide on all transfers of and below Dy SPs and recommend all transfers above Dy SPs. That has not happened. The members of PEBs sign up or sign out after the orders of postings and transfers are issued. Since this is the only Directive that seems to have been implemented on paper, and since Mr. Prakash Singh was visiting IIPA when I was pursuing an M. Phil., I asked him whether asking the Supreme Court to direct video recording of the proceedings of the PEBs with electronic date-time-stamping would be a good idea. His reply: “Agar aap DGP ban gaye ho aur tenure mila hai toh spine kyon nahin ho sakta hai aap mein?” [When you’ve become the DGP and got a tenure, why can’t you develop a spine?] I find that many officers who are championing the cause of Police reforms today are the very same officers who so signed on the dotted line “post-facto,” back-dated, in their heydays, vitiating the entire Supreme Court judgement by that one single act of theirs.

 

Police Complaints Authorities were mandated to be set up both at the State level and the district level to look into complaints of serious misconduct by the Police. A few states have set them up on paper in a half-hearted way but whether the authorities are doing any work is a moot question. Rather than embracing the Directive, Police itself is the institution vehemently opposing it.

 

National Security Commission has not been set up. This is one Directive where the government has objected to everything – the nomenclature, the composition, the functions and even the mandated two – year tenure of the chiefs.

 

So, what is the net-net, or Naatu Naatu in today’s lingo? Governments/Politicians are doing pretty much what they used to do/ what they want; in fact, the transfers, etc. have become much more frequent and vindictive. Only, these misdeeds have Supreme Court validation now, however specious. Why is the Supreme Court not able to enforce its own orders? I am told by someone who should know that just one particular lawyer, presumably at the behest of one particular state, has been stymieing the process through many, many weapons of legal skulduggery, adjournments, non-appearances, frivolous or dilatory objections, and so on. Plus, there are more pressing matters like Arnab Goswami’s bail application.

A state of mind

During my graduation, I used to do a few part-time jobs to support my expenses and joined a full-time job as an Executive Trainee in a reputed organization immediately after graduation. I was all of 19 and posted in Patna for my first assignment. 

Everything was very different. And new. A colleague offered to share his apartment with me on the condition that he was getting married in a few months and within that period, I’d find more permanent arrangements for myself. We used to eat out but decided that since we used to have tea and stuff at home, we should have a maid do the minimal cleaning up of the house and kitchen. I accosted the maid working next door and asked her to help out but she refused. In the other house, she used to do a lot of work like BJP (Bartan Jhadu Pochha), washing the clothes, dusting and so on for the entire family and I offered to pay the same amount for mere Jhadu and Bartan for two bachelors with very small requirements but she refused. I even offered to pay more but she was unmoved. I was a little upset and thought, maybe, something in my appearance or manners was off-putting.

 

A few days later, there was a knock on the door and I found the same maid standing there with bowed head. Before I could figure out anything, she was touching my feet and apologizing profusely for having refused to work in our place. I was thrilled and asked her how much would be the damages and she said whatever I pleased and she had made a huge mistake and she was abjectly sorry, she had committed an unpardonable sin by refusing earlier and on and on …

 

Turned out, she had refused to work at our house because my flat-mate was Christian. However, one day, when the milkman came, I was jolted awake and, in my hurry, had opened the door for the milk without putting on a shirt; the maid had seen my janeu (sacred thread) and was petrified at having committed the “sin” of refusing a Brahmin. I found that caste and religion were all around me. For example, “Ashok kaun, A..sh..ok, oh, achha woh bhumihar ka ghar us tarah hai,” and so on. One of those days was the last time I wore the sacred thread.

 

Shortly before my flat-mate got married, I started looking around for alternative accommodation. There were many houses, flats and even shanties to let but, intriguingly, there was none for me, for love or for money. Finally, after a long and arduous search, a deal was finalised with one person and I paid the advance. A day before moving in, I went there with a sweeper and paraphernalia to give the house a clean-up. During the process, the landlord, staying in the same building, materialised and we got chatting. Things were going well when suddenly he asked, “Aur, aapke family kab aayenge?” [So, when will your family be joining you?] I said, “Sampoorna family toh aapke saamen hai.” [The entire family is in front of you.] He was aghast and started sputtering incoherently. He said, “Sorry, ghar main jawan betiyan hain, makaan toh nahi de sakte hain aapko.” [Sorry, there’re adolescent girls here, can’t rent to you.] While all those earlier rebuffs now fell into place, I had a serious problem – no accommodation and the flat-mate getting married soon. I pleaded and cajoled; I offered to increase the rent substantially; I offered to show him the character certificate issued by my college while passing out – all to no avail. I had to check into a hotel for a few days at prohibitive tariffs until a local guy joined as another Executive Trainee. Since he was local, we found decent digs and checked in.

 

This guy was from St Stephen’s College and I was from Hindu. We decided to bury our famous college rivalries and, to celebrate, decided to see a movie. We couldn’t find a rickshaw to take us so we “borrowed” two rickshaws from a nearby rickshaw stand and merrily pedalled away to the movie hall. After the movie, when we were returning, two different guys hailed our rickshaws. Since they were going our way, we took them on board and pedalled back. On the way back, we were chatting in English on the finer points of the movie. These two “passengers” were first intrigued that we were talking in English, then curious, then inquisitive and finally aghast when they realized that we were actually educated and were out on a joy ride. They got down post-haste with profuse apologies.

 

The new flat-mate was applying for all kinds of things, GRE, GMAT, IIMs, XLRI, and so on. Being bone-lazy and very under-confident, I half-apologetically requested him to fill in a few forms for me, just on the off-chance. Well, I made it to an IIM, he didn’t. Later, he took his revenge. He not only made it to the IAS but was amongst the top five or so and was allotted his home cadre, Bihar and rose to be its Chief Secretary. When we left our first job almost simultaneously and went our separate ways, he owed me 23 rupees and 50 paise. Every time we get together, I gently remind him but he persistently refuses to pay the money back.

 

During my transition from Bihar to Bangalore, I met one of my college teachers who was himself from Bihar and recounted to him some of my adventures there. He smiled and said, “Well, Bihar is not a state; it’s a state of mind.”

Almost a personal Water-loo

 

A little after the Pincon bit, I fell grandiosely out of favour and was given a non-existent assignment. Three months into the posting, I was given some work and I held a meeting in this regard. The same evening, when I was going back home, I received a call informing that my assignment had changed. Again. In terms of pecking order of DGPs, the top of the tree is the Head of the Police Force, the numero uno, the primus inter pares, the He-Who-Is-Above-All. Then there are assorted DGPs like DG, CID, DG, IB and so on. Then there is nothing. About 10 feet below nothing is the post of Director General of Civil Defence. Which is where I landed up.

 

I had read about “disguised unemployment” in Economics. I had never expected to come across an overwhelming example of it, that too in a Police assignment. However, that was a bit of all right since I had long given up any hope or expectation of changing the world. What I had not been prepared for was the rank insubordination that prevailed. It was “disgusting unemployment.”

 

There is a wing called Water Wing Civil Defence (WWCD). Much of West Bengal is flood-prone and, on the face of it, this wing was created to assist in rescue and relief of the water-stranded population during the monsoons and otherwise. What I learnt was that this wing was created not so much to provide relief and succour but to please the constituents of a particular Minister in the hoary past through enabling him to give employment to his constituents. As such, the recruitment into the wing was purely through the whims of this one Minister and most of the personnel belonged to one single district in West Bengal, the erstwhile Minister’s constituency. Their allegiance was to that particular minister even after he was long gone and to nobody else, certainly not to rules. They were recruited without any recruitment rules. There was no formal training. Their job was not defined.

 

A large chunk of them were positioned at HQ. There were two other units for them in Kolkata, both in extremely shabby and dangerous conditions. No one maintained any kind of office hours. In case of need, they would be called from their houses hundreds of miles away. The whole purpose of emergency relief was negated in the process. During monsoons, small teams with boats were deployed at the districts. I learnt that they used to set out, stay for a few days and then hand over the boats to the local volunteers and go back home.

 

One day, on the way to a meeting at about 12 noon, I thought I’d check their attendance and marked the people who were not in office as absent. When I came back to the office, I found the Commandant practically under gherao and the staff shouting filthy expletives because of the affront. The group was led by a person in a backwards baseball cap. Gradually, I learnt that this guy (of a rank below that of a Constable) was the de facto boss of the Wing – the actual Commandant was just an optional extra.

 

Mr Baseball-cap was about to retire but it was almost a given that he was going to get a three-year extension. I decided not to forward his application for the extension. Every day, there was a deputation by the union regarding this. I politely told them that this was not a matter for the union as no collective welfare was involved and the extension was for an ex-employee. They took it up with their Central committee who sought an appointment and I refused, again on the same ground. Despite that, the big leader of their Central committee landed up in my office with a big group and threatened to barge in. I told the orderlies that if that came to pass, I will start a case against them and the orderlies for criminal trespass. After an hour-long stand-off, he went away.

 

On the day of his farewell, I heard that Mr. Baseball-cap refused to accept the garlands because he was coming back the next day. However, days rolled into months; he moved heaven and earth but nothing happened. That was one small victory.

 

The next monsoon deployment, I mixed the WWCD chaps with those of another unit, WBCEF (West Bengal Civil Emergency Force) at each point of deployment. 55 personnel who never used to get deployed for these duties were also deployed. There was complete revolt. The reason was, these two units were at loggerheads. Whenever any personnel of one unit didn’t report or disappeared, the chaps from the other unit were too keen to report. One guy walked in like a Don and asked me how dare I post him for the duty when no one had dared to do so for 26 years. They refused to even cooperate with typing the orders, let alone receiving them. If the deployment didn’t take place, it would have been a personal water-loo for me and they were banking on that.

 

As a part of digitisation drive, I had arranged for email ids of each and every personnel and for that official id, the phone no. had been supplied. I pasted the movement orders at prominent places in the office and emailed/ WhatsApped the order to each person.

 

The force had to move. However, within weeks, they wrote a letter to me with outrageous demands, in effect cancelling the whole monsoon deployment. Other demands included their full discretion on who will be deployed for monsoon duty, no shifting of the force to new premises in Kalyani, no checking of attendance and so on. I was fed up. I called them for a meeting and asked them to verbalise their demands. They reiterated what they had written. I told them I had counter demands. These were as follows: 

·       No disruptive action en masse

·       No irrational demands

·       Everyone to attend office on time

·       All deployments will be checked and absentees suspended on the spot

·       Decorum to be maintained in any communication so such letters were banned

·       Immediate shifting of their office

They threatened to gherao and started mobilising the personnel. I pulled out the resignation letter from my drawer and handed it to my PA for onward transmission. I also signed the charge report handing over charge to the next seniormost person and went home. I told the family what I had done and they were very happy, probably because of their concern about my health. This was a Friday. The office personnel didn’t send my resignation letter on that day and decided to wait till Monday. On Saturday, I kept thinking about it and decided that I should at least go out with a bang.

I rang up the Commissioner of Police and requisitioned a strong Police arrangement because there might be serious problems in my office on Monday. He asked for a formal requisition which I WhatApped to him. We had worked closely in the past as colleagues in a district and SPs of adjacent districts and he obliged. I prepared all the office orders for immediate shifting of all the three offices of the Wing lock, stock and barrel to the new location on Monday. On Sunday night, I issued the orders under “confidential” heading and deployed senior officers to the three offices from 9 AM the next day and the loading of material and shifting started. By the time the union leaders rolled in around 11 AM, they were shocked to find their thrones and their dens disappeared. They were agitated and wanted to indulge in physical fight but seeing the strength of the Police arrangement, didn’t dare. They rushed to the leaders, to the Minister and to media but didn’t get any purchase. Within the day, the shifting was complete. Later I learnt that the Commissioner of Police had given instructions that in case I was attacked, the force should first do the lathi charge and then inform him.

Even at the new place, the personnel continued to try being disruptive. When I closely enquired, I found that 50 % of them, including their big leader, didn’t know how to swim. And these were the people who were supposed to save people from drowning! When I pointed out that their jobs were not tenable, they finally caved in. I arranged for a special watermanship training for them as a reciprocal gesture.

In a long Policing career spanning 33 years, I faced agitating mobs, arrows, bullets, attacks by miscreants, serious political pressures and so on but the worst was probably reserved for the last.

When the HQ office premises previously occupied by the Water Wing was cleaned up, 123 empty liquor bottles were found. Apparently, after office hours, the “Don” (who had never been deployed for any duty for 26 years) used to hold court and, in exchange for certain favours, used to dispense out duties and deployments to fellow personnel.