Open Access Research Article
Separation Of Police Department: Investigation Wing And Law & Order Maintenance Wing And Its Impact On Establishment
Published Paper
Article Details
SEPARATION OF POLICE DEPARTMENT:
INVESTIGATION WING AND LAW & ORDER MAINTENANCE WING AND ITS IMPACT ON
ESTABLISHMENT
AUTHORED BY - GAURAV
1st Year BALLB Student
Vivekananda School of Law and Legal
Studies(VSLLS)
Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies(VIPS)
Over the
past decades, it is observed that Government is somewhere lacking in showing
its concern about the issue of losing a huge number cases in the Court of Law
because of improper and inadequate investigation due to lack of training and
specialization, which is due to alarming deficiency of police personnel and
their engagement in various purposes apart from investigation.
In the
light of the above issue, it is of utmost importance to bifurcate the police
and provide for a separate Investigation Wing from Law & Order Maintenance
side.
This
research aims to measure perception of officers towards
this “Separation of Wings” and
this may also be sincerely and purposefully observed the quote of Andre Gide who has shared that “Everything has been said already, but as no one listens, we must always begin again”.
This
paper will focus
on four main questions:
a)
First, whether bifurcation of Indian
Police into two Wings: One agency strictly
for investigation, responsible for crime investigation and second, a separate agency for maintaining law and
order, necessary? (Including Literature and Comparative Study)
b)
Second, how states are working
towards the bifurcation in Police Department
since the seven directives were issued by Supreme Court in the case Prakash Singh?
c)
Third, what are the approaches to achieve
a successful solution for this change in letter
and spirit?
d)
Fourth, what will be its overall impact
on the system?
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
An
exoskeletal structure of Police existed in ancient India. This system traces back to the period of Ramayana and Mahabharata where efforts for establishment
of local administration and policing were seen for safety and security of the citizens. In Mauryan’s
era, Arthshastra as well speaks about a highly organized
from of policing in the kingdom of Kautilya(Chanakya). Kautilya through his ‘Saptanga Theory of State ’
mentioned ‘Danda’ which means police
or army as an essential element for establishment of a state.
Further down the historical
lane a more complex, organized and formal kind of police system was setup during the Mughal rule where the administrative
structure incorporated the proper concept
of policing, patrolling and law & order maintenance duties through various posts
and ranks (Mansabdari System). With the
entry of British in Indian sub-continent, the Police System was officially conceptualized. For almost 2 decades
Britishers used to administer the territory with certain
laws and rules based on Royal Irish Constabulary but later after facing huge backlash in 1857, they
decided to tackle such problem with creation
and implementation of certain new Acts and Rules. This eventually
culminated in the creation of Police
Act V of 1861 which is still governing Indian Police System in the 21st century.
Even after 75 years of independence Indian Government continued
with the colonial
form of administration despite of initiatives and concerns to alter the police administration by giving it an independent position from political influence and interference.
The Police
Act, 1861 was introduced by the British lawmakers in order to oppress and
control population, and since then there has only minor changes on this system.
The core structure of function and reporting remained same. According to 7th
Schedule of Indian Constitution, “Police” comes under the category of State
governed subject (Entry 2) under Art.246 which means that the state governments
are responsible for providing and regulating police service to the citizens.
Therefore, each of the 28 states have their own police force. After
Independence, however, most of the states implemented the Act of 1861 unchanged
and some with minor changes.
The
implementation of reforms in Indian Police System is need of the hour. Over a
period of almost 40 years, several attempts were made by various
committees/commissions/reports in order to introduce reforms in the Indian
Police System. However, most of these reforms were not adopted, as a result of
this the Supreme Court of India issued seven directives on police reforms in the
case of Prakash Singh & Ors v. Union of India
& Ors, one of the major highlights
of this verdict was separation of the investigation and law and order function of the police. Even Supreme Court
believes that the core of the Police Reforms is embedded
in this separation.
This battle
for bifurcation of police traces back to the independence era where lawmakers
were concerned about the failure of the police mechanism along the colonial
lines. The law makers were well aware of how deeply the police system was
embedded in the roots of political influence and interference but the
government’s dominance suppressed any form of changes in the existing police
set up. Even today, no political party is willing to surrender their powers and
privilege to direct, interfere and influence police. It is important to
understand the ground problems with the implementation of this separation in
Police Department.
Part-I
Study of Literature-
Comparative Study of other countries
The conceptual study of Criminal
Investigation
The aim of criminal
investigation is ultimately to search for truth and bring the offender to book.
Section 2 (h) of the
Cr.P.C defines investigation as follows-
“Investigation” includes all the proceedings under this Code for the collection of evidence conducted
by a police officer or by any person (other than a Magistrate) who is authorized
by a Magistrate in this behalf;
Criminal
investigation literally means a lawful search and conduct for people and
objects which will lead to solving a crime and the evidence so collected can be
used to reconstruct the circumstances of an unlawful act/omission and the
accompanying mental state. The prevailing procedure for investigation has been
defined under sections 157-173 of the Cr.P.C. An investigation begins as soon
as the police registers an offence(generally criminal). It initiates from an
unknown fact or circumstances and the evidence and clues which ultimately helps
in discovering and revealing the reason and event of the crime. Efficient and
effective criminal investigations increase the probability of apprehension and
conviction of offenders. Without the preliminary investigation the case cannot
proceed further to the judicial magistrate.
It is
important to ensure the adequate and proper investigation in cases of criminal
investigation. It lays the foundation of the guilt of the accused in the trial.
The police have been given the job of collection of evidence, solving a crime
and finally charging a charge sheet in the magistrate’s court. Without any
investigation, the police complaint or information cannot culminate into a
judicial proceeding. To bring the suspected offenders before the criminal
courts, the police have responsibility for the investigation of suspected
offences and for the collection of evidence sufficient to charge a specific
person.
“Investigation”
includes all the proceedings under the Code for the collection of evidence
conducted by a Police officer or by a person (other than a Magistrate) who is
authorized by Magistrate in this behalf.”
Crimes in
today’s world are unique in nature and no two crimes are exact replicas of each
other. The police need to be well equipped and trained in handling each and
every crime with efficiency and expertise. Being equipped with the latest
technology is only half battle won, but the main emphasize lies in the
expertise and experience of the investigating officer. Criminal investigations
with all its modern methods can, at times, still be more an art than a science
and is learned by experience. This comes through specialization and consistency
at work without any political interference at any level.
Some
of the reasons for poor quality of investigations have been laid down in The
Expeditious Investigation and Trial of Criminal Cases against Influential Public
Personalities Report Submitted in March 2012 which are as follows:
1.
Police being crippled in undertaking investigation for want of latest technology instruments.
2.
Satisfactory
priority is not given for investigation of crimes due to calling
of investigating officers
for unimportant duties.
3.
Lack of awareness and failure to regularly upgrade skills of investigating officers.
4.
Submission of incomplete final reports/charge- sheets to the judicial magistrate due to lack of sufficient time for carrying
out investigation.
Therefore, in light of the importance given to investigation procedure
and the prevalent issues at hand
regarding the criminal justice system it is important to bifurcate the police and provide for a separate
investigation wing under which the police officers are exclusively
responsible for investigation and are relieved
off other law and order maintenance duties
to enhance the quality
of investigation and work.
In America, the Federal Bureau of Investigation is an independently functioning body that is responsible for solving particular kinds of crimes
relating to terrorism, human trafficking and drug trade. The advantage
of having a separate
wing promotes specialization and improves accountability of the police system
at large. Even at the state level, America
has separation of the police into
a different wing for investigation and different wing for maintaining law and order. They have a dual system and each
state is free to adopt any system as per the
need. In decentralized system, each precinct in a city has its own local detective squad, which investigates all
crimes occurring in the precinct and the detectives or investigators in a decentralized squad are considered as generalists.[1]
Whereas, in a centralized system, in contrast, all detectives operate out
of one central office or headquarters
and are each responsible for particular types of crime in the entire city.[2]
Some departments are for very serious crimes like homicide squad, sex crime
squad, theft squad and cyber-crimes squad.[3]
Taking an example of one of the most advanced and organized police structures in world- New York Police
Department (NYPD) where the Crime Scene
Unit forms part of the NYPD Detective Bureau’s Forensic Investigation Division and this unit is solely
responsible for forensic investigation in relation to crimes of sexual assaults, homicides and any other crimes.[4]
The investigation unit
comprises of detectives that have been trained for processing crimes scenes and evidence collection and have been
equipped with state-of-the-art equipment required to go down to the root of the crime scene like cast footwear, impressions, fingerprint
recognition, blood stains detection methods etc.[5]
The main aim of these detectives is
to do whatever is necessary to ensure that all
relevant evidence required
to identify the perpetrator of crimes is provided to the District Attorney in order for the trial to
proceed smoothly.[6]
This has
been possible only due bifurcation of the police system into two separate
wings. A police officer working under the investigation wing is not called upon
by the law-and-order enforcement wing. Therefore, an officer can work with full
dedication and concentration on the case he has been appointed without any
distractions.
The
investigation wing consists of detectives and support staff who are
collectively responsible for preparing the case for the District Attorney’s
Office. Further, the wing is divided as per the crimes: Crimes against persons,
crimes against property and crimes related to narcotics. The investigation wing
has forensic specialists’ who are capable of rebuilding the crime scene with
the help of modern specialized technology by using digital photography, video
equipment, and computer-aided sketches. Police in small towns and villages in
India can adopt a similar type of police structure.
Several
State Police Commissions, at different period of time, suggested structural
reforms in the police and emphasized the need to insulate it form extraneous pressures, but their core
recommendations were never implemented by the executive. The Government of India appointed
a National Police Commission
in 1977 which issued various reports on alarming need of Police Reforms and the Commission even drafted a
model Police Bill which could be enacted. Its recommendations, however,
received no more than a cosmetic treatment at the hands of the Government
of India. The political leadership was just
not prepared to give functional autonomy to the police because it had found this wing of the administration a convenient tool to further
its partisan objectives. As for the bureaucracy, control over the police was - and
continues to be - an intoxicant they
have become addicted to and are just not willing to give that up. And so, the Act of 1861 continues to be on the statute
book even after nearly 150 years
– a millstone around the police neck. Apart from the National Police Commission, several other bodies were
constituted from time to time to go into the question
of police reforms.
These were:
1.
Gore Committee on Police Training (1971-73)
2.
Ribeiro Committee
on Police Reforms
(1998)
3. Padmanabhaiah Committee on Police
Reforms (2000)
4. Group of Ministers on National
Security (2000-01)
5.
Malimath Committee
on Reforms of Criminal Justice System (2001-3)
The Gore Committee was constituted to review the state of police training in the country and suggest improvements
in overall policing techniques. The Ribeiro Committee
was set up by the Supreme Court while it was deliberating over the Public Interest
Litigation filed for police reforms; the Court wanted the Committee to examine if the National
Police Commission’s recommendations, which
formed the core of the PIL, were still relevant or that any modifications were called for. The Padmanabhaiah
Committee examined the requirements of policing
in the new millennium. The Group of Ministers examined the reports of various Committees which were set up in
the wake of Pakistan’s aggression in Kargil, including
the one dealing with internal
security, and suggested
comprehensive measures to strengthen the internal and external security
apparatus. The Malimath Committee made far-reaching recommendations to reform the criminal justice system which
primarily focuses on bifurcation of Investigation and Law and Order Maintenance Wing to
improve police credibility and
accountability. It was also of the view that the present Adversarial System could be improved by adapting some
features of the Inquisitorial System, and recommended that ‘Quest for Truth’ should
be the guiding principle of the entire
criminal justice system. The Committee suggested significant changes in
the Criminal Procedure Code to
expedite the disposal of cases and in the Evidence Act to facilitate securing of convictions . Unfortunately, the recommendations of the
Malimath Committee were trashed because of the chorus of protest from the human rights lobbies.
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.
Out of the above seven directives, the first six were meant for the State Governments and Union Territories while
the seventh directive related solely to the Central Government.
Even after the implementation of several monitoring committee, no state
is fully compliant
with these reforms
which indirectly shows that no State Government is willing to show its interest
and concern about these concerns by giving Police Department an independent position
in the environment.
Whether of bifurcating of the Indian Police into two separate wings- one
an exclusive investigation agency responsible for strictly investigation of crimes and second, maintaining law and order necessary?
The importance of this bifurcation could be seen in the era of
post-independence where law makers were aware of the fact that how deeply the police is influenced by politics. In most of the developed
counties, we see a separate independent crime
investigation wing which is solely responsible for investigation work for solving
crimes of different
nature. Countries like America, developed
an independent functioning body Federal Bureau of Investigation for solving particular kinds of crimes
relating to terrorism, human trafficking and drug trade.
The advantage of having a separate wing promotes specialization and
improves accountability of the police
system at large and also ensuring the investigation in a speedy way which
ultimately decrease the burden over the judiciary. They have a dual system (Investigation
as well as Law and Order Agency) and each state is free to adopt any
system as per the need.
Even
if we look at the small towns like Seattle, the Police Department follows a centralised system where the investigation
wing is divided as per the type of crime.[7]
The police has a different wing for patrolling and an exclusive wing for investigation purposes, but at the same
time there is coordination between both the wings of the police. Due to the bifurcation, there is specialization of police officers in
developing expertise for proper investigation and ultimately present the offender in the District Attorney’s
court. The officers are well equipped with
modern methods of collecting evidence and solving complex scenarios in
cases of homicide, sexual offences
and robberies.[8] In India
similarly established cities of similar
demographic features can adopt a system like this. Cities like Chennai,
Hyderabad and Kochin can adopt a system of bifurcation to provide speedy justice
and assure conviction.
Also,
small townships like Buena Park(City in California), with a population of about 80,000[9] as
well-defined police structure has been adopted and sufficient emphasize
has been laid upon the importance
of investigation wing.
The investigation wing consists of detectives and support staff who are collectively
responsible for preparing the case for the District Attorney’s Office. Further, the wing is divided as per the
crimes: Crimes against persons, crimes against
property and crimes related to narcotics.[10]
The investigation wing has forensic
specialists’ who are capable of rebuilding the crime scene with the help of
modern specialized technology by using digital photography, video equipment, and computer-aided sketches.[11]
In
the above analysis of different forms of police structures in different places have a common thread
running through them which is as follows:
-
Assuring timely
and proper collection of the evidence.
-
Making
sure the evidence reaches the District of Attorney for fair judicial proceedings.
This has been possible only due bifurcation of the police
system into two separate wings. A police officer working under the
investigation wing is not called upon by the law-and-order enforcement wing. Therefore, an officer can work with full dedication and concentration on the case
he has been appointed without any distractions.
ADVANTAGE OF SEPARATE
INVESTIGATION AGENCY
1. This
separation will lead to specialization in the investigation process, and this
specialization will further lead to the use of modern technology in the
investigation process. Emphasis on use of modern technological equipment,
modern interrogation technology, highly advance search devices will be
increased in the investigation process. Training, specialization, research, and
development institution will be set up to improve the investigation process.
2. A separate
investigation wing will bring the investigation department under the protection
and regulation of the judiciary as a result of this any type of political
interference or interference from the executives in the investigation will be
less. It will result in a proper investigation without any distraction or
disturbance. Under judiciary, investigation will be in accordance with the
procedures prescribed by the law. Under the judiciary, there will be
coercion-free investigation and it will create a sense or feeling of security
and assurance of fair investigation by the police which is much needed in the
present scenario.
3. In several
occasions we see police officers called to perform duties of any other
department. For example, a police officer working in an investigation team will
not be called to perform law and order duties. In the present situation where
our country is consistently developing and urbanizing, it becomes very
difficult for the police department to strike balance between maintenance of
peace and security, and investigation of criminal offences. The separation of
police wings will help the police to ensure peace and security of society and
speedy investigation process both at the same time. Deployment of police force
in case of a law and order maintenance result in removal of officers engaged in
investigating crimes. As a consequence, investigation suffers, not only in
terms of quality of work but also time taken in completing investigation.
Investigations require time and dedication, creation of a separate wing will
assure quality work and faster investigations.
4. Due to
bifurcation of the police into two separate wings, the investigation wing would
have more autonomy and freedom. Police officer working for a particular case
under the investigation wing would be responsible to the judiciary for the
conclusive evidence presented in the court. The police officer will be relieved
off other duties of maintaining law and order like security of VIP’s,
patrolling etc. and therefore his focus would be exclusively on investigation
of the case at hand leading to speedier investigations. Investigation wing
would be provided with modern equipment required for efficient and proper
investigations. Separation of the wing would lead to professionalism and
specialization of investigator leading to efficient outcomes. Proper
coordination between both the wings of police would assure progress in the
correct direction.
5. This
separation ultimately bring specialization in individual’s field of work. A
good investigation officer should be competent in fields of psychology and
sociology in order to address his witnesses, victims, suspects and accused
persons with confidence and comfort.[12]
The scorned image of the police in the eyes of the public will undergo a
transformation and help us in progressing towards community policing where the
community and police go hand in hand helping each other and securing common
interests of the society at large.[13]
How successful have the states been in incorporating
the above change in the Indian Police?
In an early
experimental attempt, on the recommendation of the Police Reorganization
Committee, 7 large cities of state of Uttar Pradesh were given a separate
investigation wing. Unfortunately, the plan was dropped as it did not function satisfactorily.[14] There
could be two possible reasons for the failure of the experiment: firstly, there
was lack of independence of the police from the clutches of the political
interference and secondly, India had just attained freedom, yet it stayed in
deplorable financial condition which could be one of the main reasons why the
state could not invest money in upgrading and training investigation facilities.
Despite the
failed attempts of the past, various commissions, analysts and reports were
confident of the positive change in the functioning of the police. Scenario
changed after 1996 after involvement of the Supreme Court in enforcing recommendations
of the National Police Commission after two former Director Generals’ of Police
(DGPs) in 1996 filed a Public Interest Litigation famously known as the Prakash
Singh Case.[15]
According
to a report of Commonwealth Human Right Initiative (CHRI) titled, ‘Government Compliance
with Supreme Court Directives on Police Reforms: An Assessment Report (2020)’ noted that “not a single state, nor the Union Territories,
comply with the directives in true earnest,” since the passing of the directives over a decade ago.
The case continued for about 10 years which established various
committees including the Ribeiro Committee
in 1998 which was responsible to travel all over the country and carry out an analysis of
changes adopted by various states. Later Padmanabhaiah
Committee report was created in 2000 and submitted various recommendations to the law commission
which eventually led to the formation of
the Police Act Drafting Committee (Soli Sorabjee Committee) in 2005 which undertook the herculean task of drafting a
new model police bill to replace the colonial 1861 Act. The case concluded
in 2006 by formulating 7 binding guidelines for all states to adopt with
immediate effect and the states had been given the discretion to adopt these guidelines through
executive orders or through state legislation. One of the directions
included separation of investigation wing for improving
efficiency and quality of the investigations.
The position
of the states in reference to compliance with this separation is somewhere mixed
and it seems unfortunate e that we have a long way to go before a complete
transformation can be brought about. Previously, on 8th November 2010, Supreme
Court issued notices to the States of Maharashtra, Utter Pradesh, Karnataka and
West Bengal for total non-compliance following the findings of the Monitoring Committee
which was set up based on Supreme Court directions.16[16]
Further, the recent Justice Verma Committee Report 2013 reinforced the importance
of the 7 directives of Prakash Singh Case and urged all states and Union
Territories its full implementation and not await new Police Act. Even judges
exclaimed in anger, “water has flown over the bridge of their patience, unless
some officers are convicted under the Contempt of Court Act, things are not going
to improve. Lack of sensitivity on part of the states cannot be condoned under any
circumstances.”
One side it
seems there is no hope but on the other side a long pending demand for
separation of crime investigation from law and order in police stations has been
complied with in the Union Territory of Goa where a separate investigation wing
has been created for investigation of certain crimes.
According
to a report of Commonwealth Human Right Initiative(CHRI), of the 28-states,
only two – Andhra Pradesh and Arunachal Pradesh were partially compliant with the
reforms. It is only after the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic where Delhi
Police announces to separate the investigation from law-and-order duties. Also,
Haryana Government recently mandate this separation to ensure fast disposal of
cases and improve quality of investigation. Back in the year of 2020. Uttar
Pradesh Government segregates crime and investigation from law and order with an
intent to make policing smarter and effective.
Part-II
Study of Supreme Court and High Court Cases
Decisions of Supreme Court
and High Courts From 2011-2021:
Some important decisions
are discussed here under:
State of U.P v Chhoteylal[17]
36.
We
are constrained to observe that the criminal
justice system is not working
in our country as it should. The police reforms have not taken place
despite directions of this Court in Prakash Singh
v. Union of India. We do not intend to say anything
more in this regard since the matter is being
dealt with separately by a three- Judge Bench.
37.
The investigators hardly have
professional orientations; they do not have modern
tools. On many occasions impartial investigation suffers because of political interference It is high time that immediate and urgent steps are taken in amending the procedural and other laws to achieve the above objectives. We must remember
that a strong and efficient
criminal justice system is a guarantee to the rule of law and vibrant civil society.
Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secy.[18]
The monitoring of investigations/inquiries
by the Court is intended to ensure that proper
progress takes place without directing
or channelling the mode or manner of investigation. The whole idea is to retain public confidence in the impartial
inquiry/investigation into the alleged crime; that inquiry/investigation into every accusation is made on a reasonable
basis irrespective of the position and status of that person and the inquiry/investigation is
taken to the logical conclusion in accordance
with law.
Voices For Freedom
vs Union of India
and Others[19]
18. ……Having regard to (i) the gravity of the problem; (ii)
the urgent need for preservation and
strengthening of Rule of Law; (iii) pendency of even this petition for last over ten years; (iv) the fact that
various Commissions and Committees have made
recommendations on similar lines for introducing reforms in the police
set-up in the country; and
(v) total uncertainty as to when police reforms would be introduced, we
think that there cannot be any
further wait, and the stage has come for issue of appropriate directions for immediate compliance so as
to be operative till such time a new model Police
Act is prepared by the Central Government and/or the State Governments pass the requisite legislations. It may further
be noted that the quality of Criminal Justice
System in the country, to a large extent, depends upon the working of
the police force. Thus, having regard
to the larger public interest, it is absolutely necessary to issue the requisite directions.
Mohammad Qasim vs State Of U.P.
And Others[20]
2.
Another reason for seeking dilution
of the direction of this Court and the Apex
Court in Prakash Singh's case1 to separate the law and order from the investigation wing is the claim that
contact of the investigating officers with the
ordinary public would be lost, if the two duties are separated. We do
not think that simply because
law and order duties are separated from investigation duties, it would interfere with carrying out investigations
into crimes. Rather we think that in
with that separation of functions can undivided attention be given to working
out the crime committed, undisturbed with the need to maintain
law and order or to perform VIP duties, by the investigating wing. We think that there are already
specialized agencies such as the CBCID, and CBI etc. which are already engaged exclusively with investigation
work. We think that the restriction of the roles
for only investigation work and their non-involvement in law-and-order duties does not detract in any manner from their capacity to work out
crimes.
Sanjiv vs State of Delhi[21]
25. …….Once again, we reiterate
that if crime is to be controlled, the investigation police must be separated from law-and-order police as recommended by Malimath Committee. One
copy of the judgment be sent to the Secretary, Ministry of Home, Government of India for necessary action.
Part-III Questionnaire
I.
Distribution of the Questionnaire: After formulating the questionnaire, it is distributed to the Police Officers
The questionnaires were distributed to police officers
and complainants, questionnaire
were distributed to several police stations in the region of North Delhi in
person.
1. Method of Data Collection: For data collection the researcher has adopted two methods i.e., Interview and Questionnaire.
2. Interview Method: The researcher adopted
the interview method in the situation where the police
officers are not willing to disclose their identity.
3. Questionnaire Method: Questionnaire were distributed in person to several Police officers
II.
Approximate number of questions:
10-15
III.
Approximate time taken to complete interview: 30 minutes
Questionnaire to Police Officers
Separation of Police Department: Investigation
Wing and Law & Order Maintenance Wing
Questionnaire to Police Officers (Sub-
Inspector of Police)
Note: This questionnaire is set-forth for the purpose of
analysis on the input(s) given by the respondents
and submission of report. The input(s) given by Respondents are purely personal
in nature and does not warrant
any publicity or shall not be share with others.
Date:
Rank & Name of the Police
Officer: District:
Experience/length of service:
1.
Do you know about reforms in Police Department? (YES/NO)
2.
How many cases are registered in your Police
Station (approximately) in a month?
Ans.
3.
How
many cases are sent to the court after thorough investigation in a month? Ans.
4.
Do you have sufficient strength of police personnel and reasonable time to investigate properly all the cases? (YES/NO)
5.
Are
you over burdened with your work?
(YES/NO). If yes, on which
following account:
a)
Deficiency of men power
b)
Assigning additional duties
c)
Inadequate infrastructure
d)
Others
6.
Do
you receive any Training in (a) investigation (b) any training orientation
program in special offences such as
offences by women, organized crime, terrorist related crimes, drugs, and cybercrimes etc? (YES/NO)
7.
What
are the problems being faced by the investigating officer during the search and seizure?
A)
B)
C)
D)
8.
Do you think that duties related
to Investigation is different from maintaining Law & Order?
If NO, then why?
Ans.
9.
What are the reasons
for the delay in the investigation in your opinion?
A)
B)
C)
D)
How would you justify this separation to be effective? According to you, what are the other
ways to achieve this bifurcation.
CONCLUSION:
Indian
police system continues to be saddled with the inherent colonial structure.
Indian legal system has undergone a transformation ever since its inception but
there are areas of law that remain obsolete and redundant. Western world has
transformed Indian society’s ideology and inbred crimes that the colonial set
up police system of India is incapable of solving. The need for a separate investigation
agency in the police has been re-emphasized since independence but till date we
fight its non-applicability and failure of implementation by states all over
the country. Supreme Court has played an active role in implementing separation
of investigation agency, now it should be the prerogative of the states to
implement these. The police cannot bring about a change itself, the functions
of the judiciary and the police are complementary, but before that the
investigation of case needs to be given prime importance. International
perspectives need to be considered while implementing bifurcation of the Indian
Police which will help us learn from their mistakes and in return create a more
suitable and refined system of police.
In order to
fine-tune the independent investigation wing there has to be continuous
training of officers, research and development, adoption of latest equipment
and co-ordination between the police and prosecutor. Importance of
investigation process cannot be undermined at any stage, specialization and
accountability will lead to qualitative and precise results and increase
efficiency of the criminal investigation system.
RECOMMENDATION:
In view of
consideration of the proposal, research thereon with regard to survey with
questionnaire responses received in light of various decision of Court of Law
and conclusion arrived thereon, it is strongly recommended that there must be
separate wings for investigation and law and order maintenance duties in the
Police Department.
REFERENCES:
1.
Bifurcation
of The Indian Police System: Investigation Wing and Law & Order Maintenance Wing by Sarthak
Karol.
2.
Problems in the criminal
investigation with reference
to increasing acquittals: A Study of Criminal Law and Practice
IN ANDHRA PRADESH
by Bureau of Police Research
and Development.
3.
Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System by Government of India with Ministry of Hiem Affairs
4.
A review of the System of Functional Division of Work in the Sample Police Stations of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka
and Punjab by Bureau
of Police Research and Development.
[1] Edward R. Maguire, Organizational Structure in American Police Agencies: Context,
Complexity, and Control.
Sunny Press Publication
[2]
Ibid
[3]
Ibid
[4] Michael D. White, Ph.D., The New York City Police
Department, its Crime-Control Strategies and
Organizational Changes. 1970-2009, http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/white.pdf
[5] Peter
K. Manning, The Technology of Policing: Crime Mapping, Information Technology,
and the Rationality of Crime
Control. NYU Press.
[6] Supra 1
[8] Ibid
[10] https://www.bppd.com/divisions/support_services/divisions/investigations.php Last visited
on 1st May, 2022
[13] Policing- Reinvention Strategies
in a Marketing Framework, Rohit Choudhary Sage Publications
[14] https://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/programs/aj/police/india/initiatives/submission_ribeiro.pdf Page-19 Last Visited
on 7th May, 2022
[15] (2006) 8 SCC 1
[16] Report of the Committee on Amendments to Criminal
Law, January 23,2013 (Justice Verma Committee
Report)
[18] Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secy., (2014) 2 SCC 532 at page 556
[20] Mohammad Qasim v. Union of India, 2013 SCC
OnLine All 13067
[21] Sanjiv v. State of Delhi 2005 (79) DRJ
556
Article Information
Separation Of Police Department: Investigation Wing And Law & Order Maintenance Wing And Its Impact On Establishment
Authors: Gaurav
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/09/27
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.