Why the Indian Police Is Often Viewed as Brutal, Corrupt, Communal, Casteist, and Violative of Human Rights

 

Why the Indian Police Is Often Viewed as Brutal, Corrupt, Communal, Casteist, and Violative of Human Rights

SR Darapuri I.P.S.(Retd)

Introduction

The police constitute one of the most visible institutions of the modern state. In a democratic society, the police are expected to protect citizens, maintain law and order, prevent crime, and uphold constitutional values. Ideally, they should function as impartial guardians of justice and defenders of human rights. In India, however, the police system has frequently been criticized for brutality, corruption, caste prejudice, communal bias, authoritarian conduct, and violations of civil liberties. Reports of custodial torture, fake encounters, unlawful arrests, suppression of dissent, and discriminatory treatment toward marginalized communities regularly appear in public discourse. Human rights organizations, judicial commissions, journalists, and civil society activists have repeatedly raised concerns regarding the functioning of the Indian police system.

At the same time, it must also be acknowledged that the Indian police force operates under extremely difficult conditions. Police personnel often face long working hours, inadequate infrastructure, political pressure, shortage of manpower, stressful environments, and public hostility. Therefore, the problem cannot be reduced merely to the moral failure of individual police officers. Rather, it is rooted in historical, structural, political, and social factors that have shaped policing in India over a long period.

The nature of Indian policing can be understood only by examining the colonial origins of the police system, the hierarchical structure of Indian society, political interference, institutional weaknesses, inadequate accountability, and the growing authoritarian tendencies within governance. The crisis of policing in India reflects not only the failure of institutions but also the contradictions of Indian democracy itself.

Colonial Origins of the Indian Police System

The modern Indian police system emerged during British colonial rule. After this, the British Crown reorganized the administration to strengthen control over the Indian population, the most important legal foundation of policing became the Indian Police Act-1861. This Act established a centralized and militarized police structure designed primarily to protect colonial authority rather than serve the people.

The colonial police were not accountable to citizens. Their primary role was to suppress political dissent, control the population, collect intelligence, and maintain imperial order. Brutality and coercion were institutionalized as legitimate tools of governance. The relationship between the police and the public became one of fear rather than trust.

After independence in 1947, India adopted a democratic Constitution guaranteeing fundamental rights, equality before law, and civil liberties. However, the colonial structure of policing remained largely unchanged. The police continued to function with a command-and-control mentality inherited from colonial rule. While the political rulers changed, the institutional culture of domination survived. Consequently, many scholars argue that India achieved political independence without fundamentally democratizing its police system.

Social Structure and the Influence of Caste and Communalism

The Indian police do not function in a social vacuum. Police personnel are recruited from the same society that is deeply shaped by caste hierarchy, patriarchy, class inequality, and communal divisions. Therefore, social prejudices frequently influence policing practices.

Caste Bias in Policing

One of the major criticisms against Indian policing is the discriminatory treatment of Dalits, Adivasis, and other marginalized communities. Numerous studies and reports suggest that members of oppressed castes often face humiliation, refusal of police assistance, delayed registration of complaints, custodial violence, and biased investigations. In many cases involving caste atrocities, the police have been accused of siding with dominant caste groups.

The implementation of the laws has frequently exposed institutional bias. Victims often report that police officers discourage them from filing cases or dilute charges against powerful accused persons. This weakens the confidence of marginalized communities in the justice system.

The roots of caste bias lie in the broader social order. Since Indian society historically normalized caste hierarchy and untouchability, such attitudes often become embedded within state institutions. Police prejudice is therefore not merely personal but structural and social.

Communal Bias and Majoritarian Tendencies

Communal polarization has increasingly affected Indian politics and society. In several instances of communal riots and religious violence, allegations have emerged that the police acted in a partisan manner. Minority communities, especially Muslims, have often accused the police of selective arrests, biased investigations, and failure to protect victims during communal violence.

Various inquiry commissions investigating riots in different parts of India have pointed toward administrative failure and, at times, deliberate police complicity. Critics argue that when political discourse becomes majoritarian, state institutions including the police may absorb and reflect such ideological tendencies.

Communal policing damages secular democracy because it undermines the principle of equal citizenship. When citizens perceive the police as aligned with one religious community or political ideology, public trust in the rule of law weakens significantly.

Political Interference and the Politicization of the Police

One of the most serious problems affecting Indian policing is political interference. Ideally, the police should function independently and impartially according to constitutional principles. In practice, however, politicians frequently influence transfers, postings, promotions, and investigations.

This political control creates a culture of loyalty to ruling governments rather than loyalty to law. Police officers may feel pressured to:

Suppress political opposition, harass critics, manipulate investigations, ignore crimes committed by influential persons or act selectively during elections and protests.

The misuse of police power for political purposes weakens democratic institutions and encourages authoritarian governance. In many cases, the police become instruments of state power rather than protectors of citizens’ rights.

Recognizing this problem, the Supreme Court of India in the landmark Prakash Singh judgment of 2006 ordered major police reforms. The Court recommended fixed tenure for senior officers, establishment of independent police complaints authorities, and measures to reduce political interference. However, implementation of these reforms has remained incomplete in many states due to lack of political will.

Brutality, Torture, and “Third Degree” Methods

Police brutality remains one of the gravest concerns in India. Custodial torture, illegal detention, forced confessions, and encounter killings continue despite constitutional protections and judicial guidelines.

The use of “third degree” methods has become normalized in many police stations. Several factors contribute to this phenomenon:

Pressure to solve cases quickly, shortage of scientific investigative tools, poor forensic infrastructure, low conviction rates and a culture that rewards results rather than legality.

Instead of relying on professional investigation and evidence collection, some officers resort to coercion and violence. Torture is often used to extract confessions or intimidate suspects. Victims are frequently poor, socially marginalized, or politically powerless.

The persistence of custodial violence reflects institutional impunity. Prosecution of police personnel accused of torture is rare, and internal inquiries often lack independence. Fear of retaliation discourages victims from seeking justice.

India has signed the United Nations Convention Against Torture but has not fully incorporated anti-torture safeguards into domestic law. Human rights activists therefore continue to demand stronger legal protection against custodial abuse.

Corruption in the Police System

Corruption is another major issue affecting Indian policing. Bribery, extortion, manipulation of investigations, and collusion with criminal networks are widely reported. Corruption emerges from several interconnected factors:

Political patronage, weak accountability, low transparency, social acceptance of bribery and economic incentives within the system.

Corruption may influence:

Registration of First Information Reports (FIRs), criminal investigations, traffic enforcement, land disputes, recruitment and postings and protection of illegal businesses.

In some cases, postings to lucrative positions become part of informal political-economic networks. Officers may then seek to recover money through illegal means. Such corruption destroys public trust and weakens the rule of law.

Weak Accountability Mechanisms

A democratic police system requires strong accountability. However, mechanisms to monitor police misconduct in India are often weak and ineffective.

Internal departmental inquiries frequently lack independence. Victims of police abuse may hesitate to file complaints due to fear of retaliation. Judicial processes are slow and expensive. Political protection often shields powerful officers from punishment.

Although institutions such as human rights commissions and courts occasionally intervene, their capacity to ensure consistent accountability remains limited. As a result, a culture of impunity develops in which illegal actions go unpunished.

The absence of effective accountability encourages authoritarian tendencies and undermines constitutional governance.

Poor Working Conditions and Institutional Stress

Ironically, police personnel themselves often work under extremely difficult conditions. Many officers face:

Excessively long working hours, lack of weekly leave, inadequate housing, psychological stress, shortage of staff and poor infrastructure.

Constables at lower levels often experience harsh hierarchical treatment within the police organization itself. Such stressful conditions can produce frustration, aggression, and insensitivity toward the public.

Training systems also remain inadequate in many areas. Police academies traditionally emphasize discipline, obedience, and crowd control more than human rights, constitutional morality, gender sensitivity, or community engagement. Consequently, democratic policing culture develops slowly.

Militarization and Authoritarian Governance

In regions affected by insurgency, separatist movements, terrorism, or communal tension, policing often becomes militarized. Special security laws and extraordinary powers may expand state authority while weakening civil liberties.

When internal security is treated as warfare, citizens may increasingly be viewed as potential threats rather than rights-bearing individuals. Preventive detention, surveillance, arbitrary arrests, and excessive force then become normalized.

Authoritarian political cultures further strengthen this tendency. Governments emphasizing nationalism, internal enemies, and strong-state ideology may encourage aggressive policing practices. Suppression of dissent, protests, and civil society activism then becomes easier to justify in the name of national security or public order.

Public Attitudes and the Acceptance of Police Violence

An important but often ignored factor is public support for authoritarian policing. Many citizens criticize police corruption and brutality but simultaneously demand instant justice and harsh punishment for accused persons. Media narratives often glorify encounter killings and aggressive policing as symbols of strength and efficiency.

This social approval creates pressure on the police to demonstrate toughness rather than legality. In such an environment, constitutional rights may appear secondary to demands for order and punishment.

Therefore, police authoritarianism is not only a state problem but also partly a reflection of broader social attitudes.

Impact on Democracy and Human Rights

The consequences of biased and authoritarian policing are extremely serious for democracy. When the police become communal, casteist, corrupt, or politically partisan:

Rule of law weakens, marginalized communities lose faith in the state, dissent becomes criminalized, civil liberties shrink and democratic institutions become fragile.

Fear gradually replaces citizenship. Instead of being viewed as protectors, police come to be seen as instruments of coercion and domination.

A democratic society cannot survive merely through elections. It also requires institutions committed to constitutional morality, equality, and human dignity. Police reform is therefore essential for the preservation of democracy itself.

Conclusion

The problems associated with Indian policing are deeply rooted in history, politics, and society. The colonial legacy of authoritarian control, caste hierarchy, communal polarization, political interference, weak accountability, corruption, and institutional stress have collectively shaped a police system that often appears brutal and undemocratic.

At the same time, reform is possible. Genuine democratization of policing would require:

Insulation from political interference, independent accountability mechanisms, stronger human rights safeguards, better training, improved working conditions, diversity in recruitment, scientific investigation methods and greater public oversight.

Ultimately, the police reflect the nature of the society and state they serve. A humane, democratic, and constitutional police system can emerge only when democratic values are strengthened throughout society itself.

A Majority of Police is Casteist and Communal

 

A Majority of Police is Casteist and Communal

by SR Darapuri ).P.S. (Retd)

The recent suicide by Y Pooran Kumar, a Dalit I.P.S.0fficer of Haryana has once  again given rise to the question about the caste discrimination within the police organisation itself. I served in the police department for 32 years in Uttar Pradesh and found that police is not only casteist but communal also. These biases operate not only while dealing with the public but also within the organisation itself. I am discussing below my own experience within the organisation. 

 

 Sometime back  a video of a police officer from Maharashtra, Bhagyashree Navtake had gone viral wherein she is seen bragging about how she files false cases against Dalits and Muslims and tortures them. It represents a crude but true picture of social prejudices in India’s police force.

It is a fact that after all our policemen come from the society, hence the police organisation is the true replica of our society. It is well known that our society is divided on caste, religion, communal and regional lines. Therefore, when the people from the society enter the police organisation they carry all their biases and prejudices with them. Rather they become stronger when such persons come to occupy positions of power. Their personal likes and dislikes; caste and communal prejudices influence their actions very strongly. These biases are often displayed in their behaviour and actions in situations where persons of other castes or communities are involved.

A situation of blatant caste discrimination came to my notice when I was posted as Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Gorakhpur in 1976. As ASP I was in charge of Reserve Police Lines. On one Tuesday, which was a Parade Day, while taking a round of Police Mess I found that some persons were taking food sitting on the cemented tables and benches whereas some were sitting on the ground. It struck me as odd. I called one Head Constable and enquired about this dining situation. He told me that those sitting on the benches are high caste men and those sitting on the ground are low caste men. I was wonder struck to see this blatant display of caste discrimination in the Police Lines. I decided to end this discriminatory practice. Hence on the next occasion when I noticed the same situation I asked the policeman sitting on the ground to get up and sit on the benches. I had to repeat it once or twice and was able to discontinue this discriminatory practice of segregated dining. Incidentally during that very period I was asked by my boss to give a report on the observations made by the Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes which in its report of 1974 had mentioned that there was a practice of segregated messing in Police Lines of eastern U.P. and Bihar. I told my boss that it was true and I had abolished this practice only recently. He told me that I should just mention that it is not there now. I don’t know about other districts of eastern U.P. but it was abolished by me in Gorakhpur district.

It came into news reported sometime back that even today the practice of not only segregated dining but there are separate barracks for high and low caste men in Bihar Police. It is shocking that it continues even today whereas Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes had pointed out this discriminatory practice as back as 1974. Actually, the police force on account of its composition is dominated by high caste men and such discriminatory practices continue unabated. It is only due to reservation policy that some persons belonging to low castes especially Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SCs and STs) have found a place in the police force which has made the force more secular and representative, however, minorities are still very poorly represented. But still the caste, communal and gender biases are quite strong in police men. This discrimination is also reflected in the treatment and posting of officers and employees of this category.

As we know there have been very frequent complaints of communal bias against Provincial Armed Constabulary in U.P. I found it to be true when I was posted as Commandant of 34 Bn P.A.C. Varanasi in 1979. On noticing it I had to make a lot of efforts to secularise my men. I always made it a point to sermonise them to be above caste and communal biases. I used to tell them that religion is your personal affair and you are only a policeman when you put on your uniform and are duty bound to act according to law. My constant briefing and debriefing had a very salutary effect on them and I was able to secularise my men. It came very clear in 1991 during a communal riot situation in Varanasi. The occasion was the General election of 1991. One retired I.P.S. officer Shri Chand Dixit was contesting election from Varanasi city as a Vishav Hindu Parishad (VHP) candidate. As usual VHP engineered a communal riot to keep the Muslims away from voting. As a result, a curfew was imposed. News appeared in the papers that PAC men had resorted to looting and beating up in a Muslim locality. I immediately started making an inquiry. To my surprise I found that these were not PAC men but Border Security Force (BSF) men who had resorted to looting, destroying property and beating up old men and women in the Muslim area. It shows that communal biases exist not only in PAC men but even among Central Para Military forces. No such complaint was received from the locality where men of my Battalion were posted.

I have experienced that the behaviour of lower ranks of police mainly depends on the behaviour and attitudes of the higher officers. If higher officers have caste and communal biases they are likely to accentuate the same among the men under them. I have personally seen many top-ranking police officers openly displaying their caste and communal biases. What to talk of lower ranks, even many I.P.S. officers do not show any change in their attitudes towards lower castes and other communities after such a rigorous training. Changing the attitude of a person is the most difficult thing because it requires a lot of effort to relieve one's ingrained prejudices and biases. Communal biases are so often displayed in so-called terror cases where there are a lot of complaints of false implications of Muslims.

It is also my personal experience that role models of the higher officers play a very important role in changing the attitudes and behaviour of lower ranks. As mentioned earlier, as Commandant of 34 Bn PAC I continuously briefed my men to be secular and free of caste and communal prejudices. My efforts gave a very good result during 1992 when the Ram Mandir movement was in full swing. One day Bajrang Dal people had planned to have a demonstration. They were to collect in the premises of the famous Hanuman Mandir of Varanasi city. The administration had planned to arrest them as soon as they came out of Mandir gate.  They had put PAC men to surround the agitators and put them in the buses. S.P. City and City Magistrate were on the spot. When the agitators came out of the gate the officers on duty ordered the PAC men to surround them and put them in the buses. But to their utter shock PAC men did not move at all and the agitators started moving towards the city. Then more PAC men had to be rushed to the spot from the City Control Room. As soon as they arrived, they surrounded the agitators and put them in the buses. Thus, a possible disturbance in the city could be avoided due to the prompt action of these PAC men. Happily, these PAC men belonged to my Battalion. The other PAC men who had refused to act belonged to another Battalion which was notorious for indiscipline. This prompt action by my men was appreciated by district administration and the recalcitrant PAC men were removed from the duty. The point which I am trying to make is that leadership in a uniform force makes a lot of difference.

As seen from the video of the Beed I.P.S. officer Bhagyashree Navtake, it is obvious that if officers like her occupy a position of authority they are likely to act in a partial manner. A constant watch needs to be kept on such officers. They should not be put on such duties where they can display their prejudices. It is also necessary to change the composition of the police force by recruiting more men from minorities to make it representative and secular. Training programmes for both officers and men should be organised to sensitise them about SC/ST, minorities and women issues. In practice the greatest influence on police behaviour is exerted by those in power, as the police are often considered the stick of those in power. If the government's agenda is caste and communal oppression, what can be expected from the police?

The Police in India Is Both Casteist and Communal

In December 2018, a video recording of a police officer from Maharashtra, Bhagyashree Navtake, went viral wherein she is seen bragging about how she files false cases against Dalits and Muslims and tortures them. What she said represents a crude but true picture of social prejudices in India’s police force.

It is a fact that after all, our police officers and constables come from the society, and hence the police organisation is a true replica of our society.

It is well known that our society is divided on caste, religious and regional lines. Therefore, when individuals enter the police force, they carry all their biases and prejudices with them.

These biases become stronger when such persons come to occupy positions of power.

Their personal likes and dislikes, caste and communal prejudices influence their actions very strongly. These biases are often displayed in their behaviour and actions in situations where persons of other castes or communities are involved.

A situation of blatant caste discrimination came to my notice when I was posted as assistant superintendent of police (ASP), Gorakhpur, in 1976.

As ASP, I was in charge of the Reserve Police Lines. One Tuesday, which was a Parade Day, while on a round of the police mess, I found that some policemen were dining on the cemented tables and benches whereas some were sitting on the ground while eating.

This struck me as odd. I called a head constable and enquired about this situation. He told me that those sitting on the benches are ‘upper-caste’ men and those sitting on the ground are ‘lower-caste’ men.

I was wonderstruck to see this blatant display of caste discrimination in the Police Lines, and decided to end this discriminatory practice. From that time on, when I noticed this, I asked the policemen sitting on the ground to get up and sit on the benches.

A still from the ‘Class of ’83’, showing police personnel in training.

Although I had to repeat my instructions more than once, I was eventually able to discontinue the discriminatory practice of segregated dining.

Incidentally, during that very period, I was asked by my boss to submit a report on the observations made by the commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SCs and STs), who in a 1974 report had mentioned the practice of segregation in the messes of the Police Lines of eastern UP and Bihar.

I told my boss that this was true and that I had abolished this practice only recently. He told me that I should just mention that it is “not prevalent now”.

I don’t know about other districts of eastern UP but in Gorakhpur I could at that time ensure the end of caste-based segregation among the police.

Although the commissioner for SCs and STs had pointed out this discriminatory practice decades ago, it is shocking that it continues even today. It was reported a while ago that the practice of segregated dining still continues, and that there are separate barracks for upper and lower caste men in Bihar Police.

Actually, the police force, on account of its composition, is dominated by ‘upper-caste’ men and such discriminatory practices continue unabated.

It is only due to the reservation policy that some persons belonging to the ‘lower’ castes, especially SCs and STs, have found a place in the police force. This has made the forces more secular and representative. However, minorities are still very poorly represented. Also, caste, communal and gender biases are still quite strong in policemen.

As we know, there have been frequent complaints of communal bias against the Provincial Armed Constabulary in UP. I found these complaints to be true when I was posted as commandant of 34 Battalion PAC Varanasi in 1979. I had to make lot of efforts to secularise my men.

I always made it a point to tell them to be above caste and communal biases. I used to tell them, ‘Religion is your personal affair. When you put on your uniform, you are only policemen and are duty bound to act according to law.’

My constant briefing and debriefing had a very salutary effect on them, and I was able to secularise my men.

This was put to test in 1991 during a communal riot in Varanasi. In the 1991 general election, a retired IPS officer, Chand Dixit, was contesting from Varanasi city as a Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) candidate. As usual, the VHP had engineered a communal riot to keep the Muslims away from voting. As a result, a curfew was imposed.

News appeared in the papers that PAC men had resorted to looting and beating people up in a Muslim locality. I immediately made inquiries. To my surprise, I found that these men were not from the PAC but from the Border Security Force (BSF), who had resorted to looting, destroying property and beating up old men and women in the Muslim area.

Representative image. Delhi Police special commissioner (Law and Order) S.N. Shrivastava inspects Johar area of the riot-affected northeast Delhi on Wednesday, Feb. 26, 2020. Photo: PTI/Manvender Vashist

This shows that communal biases existed not only in the PAC but even among the Central para military forces. No such complaint was received from the localities where men of my battalion were posted.

I have seen that the behaviour of the lower ranks of the police mainly depends on the behaviour and attitudes of higher ranking officers. If higher ranking officers have caste and communal biases, then they are likely to accentuate the same among the men under them. I have personally seen many top ranking police officers openly displaying their caste and communal biases.

The truth is that many IPS officers do not show any change in attitude towards ‘lower’ castes and other communities even after receiving such a rigorous training.

Changing one’s attitude is the most difficult thing because it requires a lot of effort to relieve oneself of ingrained prejudices and biases. Communal biases are so often displayed in so-called ‘terror’ cases where there are lot of complaints of Muslims being falsely implicated.

Also read: ‘Just a Cricket Match’: 10 J&K Men Booked Under UAPA For Playing in Memory of Slain Militant

In my personal experience, a role model in the form of higher ranking officers plays a very important role in changing the attitudes and behaviour of lower ranking policemen.

My efforts in this regard were once again put to the test in 1992 when the infamous Ram Mandir movement was in full swing.

Representative image of Bajrang Dal members in Jammu. Photo: PTI

One day, the Bajrang Dal people had planned to hold a demonstration. They were to convene at the premises of the famous Hanuman Mandir of Varanasi. The administration had planned to arrest them as soon as they came out of the temple gate. They had put PAC men to surround the agitators and put them in the buses.

The city SP and city magistrate were on the spot.

When the agitators came out of the gate, the officers on duty ordered the PAC men to surround them and put them in the buses. But to their utter shock, the PAC men did not move at all and the agitators started moving towards the city.

More PAC men had to be rushed to the spot from the city control room. As soon as they arrived, they surrounded the agitators and put them in buses. Thus, a possible disturbance in the city could be avoided due to the prompt action of these PAC men.

I was happy to note that this latter group of PAC men belonged to my battalion. The other PAC men who had refused to act belonged to another battalion which was notorious for indiscipline.

This prompt action by my men was appreciated by the district administration and the recalcitrant PAC men were removed from duty. Leadership in a uniformed force makes a lot of difference.

Also read: More Than 2,500 Sitting MLAs and MPs Face Criminal Cases, Supreme Court Informed

As seen from the video of the Beed IPS officer Bhagyashree Navtake, it is obvious that if officers like her occupy a position of authority they are likely to act in a partial manner. A constant watch needs to be kept on such officers. They should not be put on such duties where they can display their prejudices.

It is also necessary to change the composition of the police force by recruiting more men from minorities in order to make it representative and secular. Training programmes for both officers and men should be organised to sensitise them about SC/ST, minorities and women issues.

S.R. Darapuri is a former IPS officer and president of the Mazdoor Kisan Manch.

Courtesy: The Wire.In