The home minister's speech while inaugurating the 40th All India Police Science Congress
Chhattisgarh is going through a difficult time. In the last 8 weeks, there have been 28 major incidents of violence in this state. Many lives have been lost; many more have been injured. I offer my sincere condolences to the families of the deceased and I pray for the recovery of the injured. I wish to tell the people of Chhattisgarh that, in this period of difficulty, the central government stands by you. We are ready and willing to render all assistance possible in order that Chhattisgarh will be able to overcome the challenges to the security of its people.
Policing a country of over 1.1 billion people is not an easy task. Policing a country in a troubled neighbourhood makes the task more difficult. And policing a country with insufficient police stations and inadequate and ill-equipped police forces makes the task almost formidable. Today, therefore, I wish to share with you some thoughts on the state of policing in India and ask you, in this Congress spread over three days, to reflect on the subject.
Let me begin with the size of the state police forces. I shall use broad and approximate numbers. According to figures given to the central government, the total number of sanctioned posts as on March 31, 2010, in all ranks, is about 21 lakhs. Of these, about 3,35,000 posts are vacant. Thus, the police: population ratio for the whole country is about 160 per 100,000 persons. This ratio, much lower than the international norm, conceals more than it reveals. It is an average. In a state like Bihar the number is about 75; in UP it is about 115; in Andhra Pradesh it is about 125; in Orissa it is about 135; in Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand, two states most affected by Left Wing Extremism, the number is about 205.
Further, the distribution of the police force among the police stations is badly skewed. First of all, there are not enough police stations. Even where there is a police station, the strength of the police force in a station is often no more than 20 persons. In some of the districts most affected by Left Wing Extremism, the police station exists only in name. I do not wish to name the states or the police stations but, believe me, there are police stations where the Station House has been blown up; there are police stations where there are no more than 8 men; and even these 8 or less men do not hold any weapons for fear of the weapons being looted. You will recall the case of Lalgarh police station in district West Midnapore in West Bengal. That police station was closed – and locked from the inside – for several months until the CRPF ‘liberated’ it.
Let me turn to the training imparted to our police forces in the states. Most states have barely sufficient capacity to impart basic training to newly recruited constables. It is not often realised that the capacity of the training institutes limits the number of constables that can be recruited in any year in that state. The result is that states are barely able to recruit the number of policemen and women necessary to fill vacancies that arise due to normal attrition – retirement, resignation, disablement or death. How will states be able to add to the net strength of their Police Forces? Unless capacity is increased manifold, states will not be able to fill the huge number of vacancies – estimated at 3,35,000 – and increase their sanctioned strength. Hence, the first order of business is to enhance the capacity of training institutes in the states to at least double the present capacity and to recruit at least double the number of policemen and women that are being recruited, at present, every year.
Even if the states do that, that would only take care of basic training. That basic training is not adequate to meet the new challenges to security such as terrorism, insurgency and Left Wing Extremism. Besides, specialised schools are necessary to train the police forces in forensic investigation, detective training, intelligence gathering, cyber crime and so on. I do not find states addressing these new and growing requirements. So far as the central government is concerned, in order to assist the state Governments, we have decided to set up one Central Academy for Police Training (CAPT) with a capacity to train 2,600 personnel; two Central Detective Training Schools (CDTS), each with a capacity to train 400 personnel; and twenty Counter Insurgency and Anti-Terrorist Schools (CIAT) each with a capacity to train 1,000 personnel, in a year. While CAPT and CDTS will take some time to be established, three CIAT schools are operational and twelve more are likely to be completed in the current year. You will note that all of the above adds to a total training capacity of 23,400 personnel per year, and that is hardly sufficient for a force level of nearly 21 lakhs for all the states put together. Obviously, more needs to be done, and this can be done only if the states set apart more resources for augmenting training capacity.
As far as officers are concerned, the central government has made it mandatory for IPS officers to go through a Mid-Career Training Programme in three phases. At three levels of promotion, that is from SP to DIG, DIG to IG, and IG to ADG, we have now stipulated that the IPS officers shall undergo in-service training before he is promoted.
While I shall presently deal with technology in policing, let me emphasise that, ultimately, policing depends upon the men and women that we are able to put on the ground. It is not only the number that matters; it is the quality of recruitment, the quality of training and the quality of human resource management that will matter. Hence the case for police reforms. The central government had recommended that state Governments adopt the Transparent Recruitment Process (TRP). Of the 30 states, only Uttar Pradesh has actually implemented TRP. Four states have reported that they have their own TRP; 13 states have acknowledged the recommendation; and no response has been received from 12 states.
The central government had also urged the states to adopt the salient recommendations of the National Police Commission. Some of these recommendations, I may remind you, are mandatory by an order of the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, the progress is halting. Let me take three recommendations: enactment of a new Police Act based on the Model Police Act; constitution of a state Police Establishment Board and setting up a Police Complaints Board. Only 12 states have enacted a new Police Act, only 14 states have constituted the Police Establishment Board and only 10 states have set up the Police Complaints Board. I am afraid there is a long distance to go before we can say that the states have implemented the recommendations of the National Police Commission.
I shall conclude my remarks with a brief reference to technology. Technology is the best force multiplier. It also relieves police personnel from routine and repetitive chores and allows them to concentrate on tasks that require application of intelligence, analysis, forecasting and planning. Technology can be inducted quickly into functions such as surveillance, communication, data management, inventory management and personnel management. Advanced technologies are available and can be used for data collation and correlation, data mining, analysis and prediction. Towards these objectives, the central government is implementing, in collaboration with the state Governments, the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) project that will lay the basic framework and provide the connectivity throughout the country. NATGRID will employ advanced technology and help take the quality of policing to a higher level. And when the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) is set up, that body will also induct very advanced technologies into its processes and functions.
I am conscious of the fact that what I have stated so far is not an exposition of any subject that would qualify as a ‘science’. It may be more appropriate to describe the matters on which I have spoken as belonging to the realm of ‘commonsense’. Later today, and in the next two days, you will discuss matters relating to modernisation, counter terrorism, Left Wing Extremism, data management and future policing. I want you to know that despite criticism from every quarter – from hapless citizen to arm chair pundit, from defence lawyer to learned judge, from political parties to civil society organisations and from editorial writers to television anchors – you should be proud to wear your uniform and perform your duties. Because, when hit by a crisis or a tragedy, everyone – and I mean everyone -- turns to the police. More often than not the presence of a policeman is reassuring. More often than not the deployment of the police force restores law and order and security. More often than not the policeman turns out to be a friend and protector. And, let us remember, in a conflict situation, the person most likely to make the supreme sacrifice is a policeman. Therefore, let not criticism – sometimes justified, often unjustified -- deter or demoralise you. Your obligation is to the law. As long as you enforce the law, uphold human rights, use no more than the minimum force that is necessary, and act without fear or favour you can hold your head high as a member of the police force.
