Police Reforms in India

“Police” being a State subject in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India, it is the State Governments/UT Administrations, which have to implement the various police measures. In This regard role of Centre is just advisory in pursuing states for Police Reforms. to 

Committees / Commission on Police Reforms:

National Police Commission (1978-82): The major recommendations of the NPC to amend the Code of Criminal procedure 1973 and the Bill to this effect was passed in the Rajya Sabha on 4.5.2005 and in Lok Sabha on 9.5.2005 respectively.

Ribero Committee: It was constituted on the directions of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Prakash Singh vs Union of India and others pertaining to implementation of the recommendations of the National Police Commission. The Rebeiro Committee endorsed the recommendations of the NPC with certain modifications.

Padmanabhaiah Committee on Police Reforms: Government had set up a Committee in January, 2000 under the Chairmanship of Shri K. Padmanabhaiah, former Union Home Secretary, to suggest the structural changes in the police to meet the challenges in the new millennium. Its recomendations related to recruitment and training of police officers in not accepted and remaining recomendations can be implemented without much changes in administration.

Malimath Committee on Reforms in the Criminal Justice System: Government had set up (November, 2000) this committee to consider and recommend measures for revamping the Criminal Justice System.

These pertain to strengthening of training infrastructure, forensic science laboratory and Finger Print Bureau, enactment of new Police Act, setting up of Central Law Enforcement agency to take care of federal crimes, separation of investigation wing from the law and order wing in the police stations, improvement in investigation by creating more posts, establishment of the State Security Commission, etc.

The Supreme Court of India has passed a judgement on September 22, 2006 in Writ Petition (Civil) No.310 of 1996 – Prakash Singh and others vs UOI and others on several issues concerning Police reforms. The Court in the said judgement directed the Union Government and State Governments to set up mechanisms as directed by December 31, 2006 and file affidavits of compliance by January 3, 2007. The directions inter-alia were: 

(i) Constitute a State Security Commission on any of the models recommended by the National Human Right Commission, the Reberio Committee or the Sorabjee Committee. 

(ii) Select the Director General of Police of the State from amongst three senior-most officers of the Department empanelled for promotion to that rank by the Union Public Service Commission and once selected, provide him a minimum tenure of at least two years irrespective of his date of superannuation.

(iii) Prescribe minimum tenure of two years to the police officers on operational duties. 

(iv) Separate investigating police from law & order police, starting with towns/ urban areas having population of ten lakhs or more, and gradually extend to smaller towns/urban areas also, 

(v) Set up a Police Establishment Board at the state level for inter alia deciding all transfers, postings, promotions and other service related matters of officers of and below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, and 

(vi) Constitute Police Complaints Authorities at the State and District level for looking into complaints against police officers. 

(vii) The Supreme Court also directed the Central Government to set up a National Security Commission at the Union Level to prepare a panel for being placed before the appropriate Appointing Authority, for selection and placement of Chiefs of the Central Police Organisations (CPOs), who should also be given a minimum tenure of two years, with additional mandate to review from time to time measures to upgrade the effectiveness of these forces, improve the service conditions of its personnel, ensure that there is proper coordination between them and that the forces are generally utilized for the purposes they were raised and make recommendations in that behalf. 

Regarding WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.310 OF 1996, in 2019, SC gives following further directions  regarding appointment of State Police Chiefs:

(a) All the States shall send their proposals in anticipation of the vacancies to the Union Public Service Commission, well in time at least   three   months   prior   to   the   date   of 4 retirement of the incumbent on the post of Director General of Police;  

(b) The  Union   Public  Service  Commission shall prepare the panel as per the directions of this Court in the judgment in Prakash Singh’s   case(supra)   and   intimate   to   the States; 

 (c) The State shall immediately appoint one of the persons from the panel prepared by the Union Public Service Commission;  

(d) None of the States shall ever conceive of the idea of appointing any person on the post of Director General of Police on acting basis   for   there   is   no   concept   of   acting Director   General   of   Police   as   per   the decision in Prakash Singh’s case(supra)

(e) Minimum Tenure of 2 years for DGPs.

(f) Merit and   seniority   should   be   given   due weightage. 

(g) Any legislation/rule framed by any of the States or the Central Government running counter   to   the   direction   shall   remain   in abeyance to the aforesaid extent.

Reference:

" Status Note on Police Reforms in India " - Ministry of Home Affairs

Supreme Court of India - I.A. NO.24616 OF 2019

Prakash Singh & Ors Vs. Union of India and Ors

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Russian parliament passed a bill to revoke its ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

Interstellar space and Interstellar Probes ( Voyager and New Horizons Missions )

ISRO developing semi-cryogenic engine working on LOX Kerosene propellant