The custodial torture of a citizen accused of forging a passport by a Delhi police inspector at the IGI (Indira Gandhi International ) airport in connivance with a junior resident doctor and the censure by a local judicial magistrate (April 8), who ordered that an FIR be registered against the inspector, is reflective of a disturbing reality of policing in India – the impunity with which torture is resorted to by those entrusted to wield their investigative mandate within the framework of the law.
Earlier, on March 13 a serving colonel of the army and his son were subjected to a brutal assault over a minor parking dispute near a hospital in Patiala by three Punjab police inspectors, who were alleged to be inebriated. Media reports indicated that the police personnel were unusually vicious in their conduct and even warned the victim – a senior army officer - that the lives of his family could be endangered if they reported the matter. And in a familiar but disturbing trend across many parts of India where the guardian turns predator and the police act in a criminal manner – the Punjab police registered an FIR only on March 22. This may have been due to the intense media attention that the case generated and the fact that the colonel's wife had to approach the defence ministry in Delhi for redress.
Democracy and legal restraints on use of force by the state are intertwined
Police resorting to torture with political concurrence and on occasion ‘encounter’ justice (killing a suspect to avoid long drawn out legal procedures) is a global phenomenon and India is no exception. However this cannot be justified and is an abdication of a central tenet of a democracy – that state force can and will be used only within the boundaries of the law.
These are issues that have been reviewed in considerable detail in a comprehensive report released (March 26) by Common Cause (CC) – a very respected NGO in collaboration with CSDS (Centre for the Study of Developing Societies). Rich in data, the findings of this excellent report have been derived from interviews/ interactions with over 8000 police personnel across 17 states. The respondents include Constables and Head Constables, upper subordinates (from the ranks of Assistant Sub-Inspector to Deputy Superintendent of the Police) and to my mind the most significant cluster – IPS officers, who are at the top of the police pyramid.
The spectrum of inputs also includes in-depth interviews with doctors, lawyers, and judges whose jobs involve interacting with the police and people in custody.
CC and CSDS are to be commended for this major contribution, when objective data collection related to the efficacy of governance and preliminary analysis, however constructive, is being discouraged in India.
The tragic reality is police believe torture is justifiable
The central findings of this study indicate “that a significant proportion of police personnel justify the use of torture and violence in the course of their duties, and also believe that they should be allowed to use force without any fear of punishment.”
However it also highlights the fact that not all police personnel subscribe to this orientation and that there is a vast difference in the manner in which policing duties are discharged from state to state. Kerala records the highest level of professional rectitude and compliance to due procedure (94 percent) while Jharkhand reported the lowest (8 percent).
The report is not a litany of only bleak findings and it must be noted with some satisfaction that 74 percent of police personnel across India, among those interviewed noted that “no matter how dangerous a criminal is, the police should try to catch them and follow proper legal procedures.”
Dangerous predispositions
But the disturbing findings must be noted for their long term implications and in my reading of this report, table 2.11 is one that merits tentative comment. In response to the question: “According to the police, who are more likely to be ‘naturally prone’ to committing crimes?” – answers point to a perception that needs professional review by state and society. Rich and powerful people top this list at 22 percent and in second place, 18 percent, are the hapless Indian Muslim citizens.
That the law is applied differently for the rich and powerful is an undesirable but ugly reality in India and ignoring this trend can have serious implications for internal security. At the other end of the spectrum – Muslims, slum dwellers and migrants who collectively add up to 43 percent are the most likely to be subjected to torture and related police excesses.
In an encouraging sliver among the findings, a majority of the police personnel interviewed believe “that training on human rights (79 percent), prevention of torture (71percent) and evidence-based interrogation techniques (79 percent) is very important.” Furthermore, among the respondents with a high propensity to justify torture, 70 percent, feel that training on prevention of torture is very important.
The IPS which provides the leadership to the rank and file of police constabulary has a complex institutional responsibility but is operating within a colonial framework inherited from the era of the British Raj. Policy correctives and a review of existing legislation is sorely needed but this has remained elusive. The deeply embedded criminal-politician nexus that was highlighted in the Vohra Committee Report (1993) remains cloistered.
One hopes that the apex internal security leadership in the country will review the CC report objectively and introduce correctives where possible in an earnest manner. Casual and callous police torture as in the Colonel Bath case among countless others cannot be allowed to become the norm in the world’s largest democracy.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
