The outcry against ‘supersession’ of Dr Kiran Bedi, director general of the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D), raises several questions regarding the selection of police chiefs. At a time when the Union and state governments are under the Supreme Court whip to bring about police reforms immediately, it is not incidental that one such reform suggests transparent and tenured appointments.

The end of Congress hegemony after the 1967 general elections triggered greater partisanship in appointments to the apex chairs of various public services, a trend which only intensified with time. As expected, ‘smart’ officers took advantage of the situation, taking pride in and indeed wielding their political affiliations. The smarter among them made sure to accommodate the political weather cock. Lately, the ‘meritocracy argument’ has taken root, disregarding the line of seniority. Delhi Police, too, is one part of the trend and neither the collective nor the Union Territory cadre has ever protested. But supersession is indeed a larger issue of administrative and police reforms, transcending the example of an individual officer.

Has Kiran Bedi, ‘the first woman IPS officer’ of the country, really been superseded? She holds the highest rank that her service can offer, received her promotion in time and is tasked with heading the Indian police’s only R&D department — a duty she has conducted with usual flair. Nonetheless, the pertinent question emanating from the larger issue of police reform is whether an IPS officer should be promoted to that level. Much water has flowed down the country’s rivers since the days the ambitious but unaccommodated would retire as deputy inspector generals, no complaints, no question asked!

... contd.