Essay on criminalisation of police in India

ROHIT BURA

Advertisements:

Essay on criminalisation of police in India

In the last three decades or so, different types of cases have been reported in newspapers which
indicate the criminalisation of police. This is found in three forms: (1) policemen committing crimes
themselves, (2) policemen helping criminals in committing crimes and getting a share out of it, (3)
policemen resigning from the department and joining the militant groups engaged in killing, looting
and abduction, etc. In these three types, we have not included police corruption which by itself is a
crime.

Robberies, extortions, kidnappings for ransom, and rapes of innocent women are some of the crimes
allegedly committed by men in uniform. On May 28, 1992, a head constable and two constables were
among the five persons arrested for forcibly taking away an employee of a private firm ill Delhi and
then extorting Rs. 1,100 from him.

In June 1993, a constable of Delhi Armed Police allegedly kidnapped and raped a 16-year-old girl. A
head constable and two constables were arrested in one state in July 1994 for allegedly extracting Rs.
40,000 from two youths after threatening to involve them in narcotic offences. In January 1996, four
policemen were arrested in Delhi for following four passengers from the airport and trying to rob
them of their gold and money.

A few months earlier, a head constable posted at Indira Gandhi International Airport and a head
constable working in the armed police battalion along with some others robbed a passenger and his
friend of 66 gold biscuits worth more than Rs. 30 lakh.

In March 1996, two constables in one city stopped an auto-rickshaw passenger, threatened him and
took Rs. 4,000 from the complainant. These are some of the crimes reported & newspapers from
time to time.

A close scrutiny of the cases clearly indicates that in a large number of cases, it is the constables and
head constables who are involved in crimes. Unless exemplary punishment is given to such
undesirable elements, the image of men in uniform is bound to sink low.

Reacting to the non-tracing of a kidnapped girl by the Delhi Police, the Supreme Court observed on
February 12, 1994: "This court is determined to show to this country what type of police force they
are paying taxes for.

If these police officers serve a sentence, then only they will learn lessons." A judge of the Allahabad
High Court a few years earlier had observed that "the police was the most organised group of
criminals".

Unlawful activity by a policeman has been described as a manifestation of personal moral weakness,
a symptom of personality defects, or the recruitment of individuals unqualified for police work.
 Are the policemen themselves responsible for their criminality or is it the police system that patterns
them in illegal practices? Should police crime be analysed through the individualistic approach or the
group approach?

The first approach assumes inherent personality characteristics to be the determinant which makes a
policeman a criminal. Current literature on police personnel management reaffirms individualistic
orientation towards police crime. This approach suggests that the quality of police service is
dependent upon the individual policeman.

A modified version of this (individualistic) approach is the view that perhaps the individual chosen
had already become 'contaminated' prior to being recruited as a member of the police force, and
when presented with chances for bribery or acquiring material things, the 'hard core guy' steps in.

In contrast to this individualistic approach is the group approach. Scholars like McCorkle, Cloward
and Merton see police crime as a natural consequence of societal demands for illegal services. When
these desired services are not provided through legal structures, they are attained through illegal
means.

However, there is little empirical proof for this view. Some people suggest that "crime is a way of life
of police". Large criminal gangs want police support in committing crimes. They, therefore, keep
many police officers on their payrolls. The 'good' citizens also try to buy police favour whenever the
occasion demands it.

Once a Policeman commits one 'crime', it becomes his 'norm' or 'informal standard' of his behaviour.
Many policemen thus come to be 'socialised' m criminal behaviour 'permitted' in the police system.
When the reference group' norms involving illegal activity become routinised with Use, they become
identifiable informal patterns of behaviour.

Some of the terms used to describe police deviancy have become popular. These are: mufatkhori (an
act of receiving free 'gifts' like liquor, cigarettes, groceries, etc.

For possible future acts of favouritism), dadagiri (police demand for free admission to picture houses
and entertainment places, shopping (picking up small items from shops without payment), vasooli
(demanding money for advertisements in police magazines or purchase of tickets to police
functions), bribery (payment of cash), and harapna (appropriating expensive items for personal use).

Amongst these activities, vasooli, bribery, shopping, and harapna are all clearly unlawful but the
manner in which they are carried out contains a measure of safety to the policeman, should his
presence or behaviour be questioned.

A policeman's investigative powers allow him entry into houses, shops, etc. in which a 'suspected
theft' has occurred or search a person who is 'suspected' to be involved in 'crime'. Hence, 'search' is
not 'suspected', rather it is 'expected'.

'Shopping', harapna thus become easy. In one of the recent railway accidents, cases were reported in
the newspapers in which villagers saw many policemen 'searching' the bodies, pockets and bags of
the victims, later on reported as theft of ornaments, money and possessions. Criminalisation or
"khaki-coat crime" is thus getting widespread in the police.

Related Articles:
416 Words Essay on My Hobby
Essay on a Short Story

Advertisements: