Veteran communist leader Indrajit Gupta, then Union home minister, prophetically concluded his letter to chief ministers on police reforms and restructuring on April 3, 1997 thus: “if the political executives do not take the desired measures even now to bring about suggested reforms and restructuring of the police, the day may not be far off when the judiciary may intervene decisively to force such socially desirable changes down the throat of the political executives.”

Even as the Police Act Drafting Committee (PADC) headed by Soli Sorabjee has put out for public debate the draft for a new Police Act to replace the antiquated Indian Police Act of 1861 on September 6, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court delivering its judgment on September 22 on a writ petition filed by Prakash Singh and others in 1996, directing the Union government to create accountability structures and minimise politicisation in the police.

Two genuine and unexceptionable concerns are visible in the instructions issued by the SC for police reforms — one, political interference in and politicisation of the police should be prevented; two, accountability structures within the police organisation need to be created and strengthened forthwith. Some introspection on the apex court’s role on governance issues, and on a technical subject like police reforms in particular, should precede a review of its substantive ‘directives’ for police reform. Often, this has led to confusion rather than a solution.

A prescription for police reform which touches just the surface of the police’s institutional anatomy is unlikely to cure the deep-rooted organisational ailments accumulated over the past two centuries if we take into consideration the reorganisation and restructuring of the police undertaken from the time of Lord Cornwallis. A non-pragmatic deadline for the implementation of directives that have not been discussed by experts and debated in public, has the potential of causing more problems than it can solve. Coming at a time when a distinguished panel is already on the job, the directive of the honourable court appears mistimed.

... contd.