The Case Diary

A senior BJP leader had once famously recited this in Parliament to a former prime minister. Loosely translated, ‘My complaint is not with the highway robbers…they are bound to be there. The real question is about your guardianship.’ Somebody may just quote that line to Delhi Police one of these days. Once just a downhome, local fleet of khaki not very different in composition or behaviour from those in Delhi’s surrounding rural swathes—with none of the cosmopolitan glamour that attached to their counterparts in, say, Bombay—it’s been a gritty, often unheralded existence for them, never quite attaining urban folklore status. Of late, though, the force has been notching up some serious global media attention. Only, not of the flattering kind.

You know the basics: Greta Thunberg, a Google Docs ‘Toolkit’; a grandiosely-worded FIR against unnamed persons for ‘waging social, cultural and economic war against India’; and, as a coda, 22-year-old climate activist Disha Ravi being arrested under sedition charges. But these had actually come on the back of a long series of contentious events involving Delhi Police: whether it’s the farm protests now, the migrant exodus last spring, the February riots in northeast Delhi from exactly one year ago, the anti-CAA protests in Jamia Millia Islamia and the Shaheen Bagh sit-in before that, or the violence in JNU in January 2020. Debatable arrests—including of students and journalists—stand like trophies atop action that would make for extreme contrasts: counting as either excessive, or as absence of action.

ALSO READ: ‘Police Are Now Dictated By Political Bosses’

Are the critics overlooking something? After all, it can’t be an easy life, policing a sprawling, messy capital city that has known terrorism for almost four decades, and has seen its population multiply six times in that time? And India’s politics isn’t the most laid-back of them all. How do you square the circle?

Geometrically speaking, you can’t. The judiciary has been weighing in on that. A Delhi court, granting bail to Disha Ravi on February 23, did some plainspeaking. “The offence of sedition cannot be invoked to minister to the wounded vanity of governments,” it said. Additional Sessions Judge Dharmender Rana didn’t mince words. The evidence presented by Delhi Police was “scanty and sketchy”, he said, adding words that could be profitably broadcast nationally on Republic Day: “(Citizens), the conscience-keepers of government in any democratic nation, cannot be put behind the bars simply because they choose to disagree with State policies.” Days earlier, the same judge had given bail to another person charged with sedition, a 21-year-old labourer, saying, “The law of sedition…cannot be invoked to quieten disquiet under the pretence of muzzling miscreants.” On February 19, the Delhi High Court granted bail to three Muslim men charged with killing another Muslim during last year’s rioting…using the same TV footage that Delhi Police had adduced as incriminatory! Justice Suresh Kumar Kait used the words “conjecture…not based on scientific fact” for the evidence and “copied and pasted” for the eyewitness testimonies.

ALSO READ: ‘Delhi Police Is 200 Per Cent Impartial’

In short, a cloud of question marks covers the conduct of Delhi Police in many high-profile cases. Its functioning is being seen as partisan, and its use of the draconian sedition law rather too trigger-happy—not winning India any points globally for democratic tolerance of dissent. Its proactive, maximal approach in cases like that of Disha, former JNU president Kanhaiya Kumar and anti-CAA protesters like Sharjeel Imam and Pinjra Tod activists stands in stark contrast to the way it seems to overlook the indiscretions of those like BJP leaders Kapil Mishra and Anurag Thakur, who had publicly made inflammatory speeches before the Delhi riots. With a senior police officer standing next to him, Mishra had threatened anti-CAA protesters with forcible removal, saying “we will not listen to the police if roads are not cleared after three days”. Union minister Thakur had publicly raised the slogan “desh ke gaddaron ko, goli maaro saalon ko”. The police took no action against either of them.

There are both critics and defenders within the policing community and beyond. Delhi Police Commissioner Sachidanand Shrivastava, in an exclusive interview to Outlook, offers a robust defence on all scores (read interview: ‘Delhi Police is 200 per cent impartial’). Former police officers and legal experts also point to the high levels of stress involved in policing a metropolis like Delhi, which hosts two governments in a messy relationship—the Centre, to which Delhi Police reports, and the state’s own. In addition to maintaining law and order, investigating cases, filing chargesheets, going to courts and handling protests, Delhi Police is burdened with incessant VVIP duties—providing security to embassies, visiting foreign dignitaries, ministers, even manning the traffic routes.

ALSO READ: Sedition: A Minatory Frown

Maintaining order in society is a primary good, even if, even when the phenomenon of policing is seen globally, it can often get to be too much of a good thing. And there are indeed gaps Delhi Police cannot gloss over. Former IPS officer N.K. Singh, who served as CBI joint director, says questions are bound to be raised since nothing can justify the different treatment it has meted out in the ‘Toolkit’ case, on the one hand, and turning a blind eye to the inflammatory speeches by BJP leaders. “Even the case against Kanhaiya doesn’t seem very strong. They somehow managed to file a chargesheet, but I don’t think the sedition case will stand the court’s scrutiny,” he adds. Former ACP Ved Bhushan, president, Delhi Police Federation, proffers the view that just because conviction rates are low in sedition cases doesn’t mean the crime didn’t happen. “The police works as per the law. As long as the sedition law exists, the police will use it as it sees fit,” he explains. Bhushan concedes the number of sedition cases has gone up due to challenges in the past few years. “When the police have to deal with protests that arise from political decisions, it becomes a problem. If the police want, they can remove protesters within a day. But with decisions like CAA-NRC being completely political, it’s not easy for the police. It never is in a democracy,” he adds.

Ashok Chand, who investigated high-profile cases like the Parliament attack and the Red Fort attack as the head of Delhi Police’s Special Cell, too says dissent has to balanced against other needs. “When dissent degenerates into anarchy, it becomes necessary to maintain law and order in society. According to me, Delhi Police has acted with utmost restraint,” he says. Senior lawyer Amit Khemka too refuses to attribute motives and says Delhi Police might have acted with a bonafide belief that there is something malicious in the toolkit case. “The judge who sent her (Disha) on remand initially should have looked at the evidence more carefully. It was his duty to go through the case diary, see to it that the provisions regarding the arrest have been followed, and also look for prima facie evidence of some commission of offence. Else, the remand should ordinarily not be granted,” he explains.

Policing has become more complex with the advent of social media. “In the last few years, it’s been a war of narratives. Whether the farm protests or Shaheen Bagh, it’s evident that people sitting there are not deciding the narrative. That’s being done by a small group through social media,” claims a senior Special Cell officer. And given the intense levels of polarisation verging on discord, that, inevitably, has come under the lens. Former ASG and senior criminal lawyer Sidharth Luthra points to the obverse of the coin: narratives are now even driving the criminal justice system. “Policing, prosecution and criminal litigation is increasingly about narratives. The CrPC gives the police powers to search, arrest etc. It’s for the courts to decline unjustified remands and be liberal on bail,” he tells Outlook. “Amidst criticism of the police, we need to ask ourselves, 75 years post-independence have we created systems of oversight for the independent functionality of police? And if not, can the elected leadership avoid responsibility?” he asks.

ALSO READ: Suffering By Default

This, then, is a vital link in the chain—and a fraught one that spreads debility. P.S. Pasricha, who has been both Mumbai police commissioner and DGP Maharashtra, says the police can never be completely insulated from political pressures—especially in Delhi, more vulnerable than other states because it’s directly under the Union home ministry. It’s up to the top police officer to “stand up” and convince political bosses about the possible fallout of a wrong action rather than simply give in, he tells Outlook. Another retired IPS officer, who has served in Delhi, says the IPS fraternity is responsible for coming under pressure. “Increasingly, the officers try to be in the good books of the powers-that-be. Once you use political connections, you become pliable,” he says. A recently retired IPS officer says it’s only during his last few years in Delhi Police that directions started coming from the top. “It’s good I retired when I did. In my career, I worked by the rule of ART: Accountability to law (not to any person), Responsiveness, Transpare­ncy,” he says.

The leader of the force is all-important, and weakness at the top travels down. Earlier, only the police commissioner’s appointment was done by North Block. “Officers below him were generally insulated. Now if the CP is not strong, the officers would always be second-guessing him,” the veteran adds. A fellow senior retiree, who handled several high-profile cases in Delhi, says the CP also has to trust his officers and allow them a free hand to act judiciously. “Over the years, it has so happened that the police chief is looking up to the political bosses for directions. Down the line, nobody is willing to take action. In a developing situation, instant decisions need to be taken by the officer on the spot. Now he keeps looking at his senior, waiting for directions. This dilemma among officers makes the situation worse, especially if they know the top man is not going to protect them,” he says.

ALSO READ: When Blind Hate Took An Eye For An Eye

He cites an example from 28 years ago. The BJP had planned a rally on February 25, 1993, in the wake of the Ayodhya demolition—then party chief M.M. Joshi had given a call to party workers from all over India to converge at Delhi Boat Club to protest the Narasimha Rao government’s plan to ban the RSS and VHP. One lakh people were expected, and the police had orders not to let even a single BJP worker reach the venue. High alert, Section 144, borders sealed, a three-tier security ring around Boat Club. “The day passed without a single shot being fired. But water cannons and teargas had to be used. The BJP president was injured, over 4,000 people were taken into custody, including 100 BJP MPs,” recalls the IPS officer, who was on duty that day. A huge uproar followed—31 privilege motions were moved against police excesses. “Officers were named, but then CP M.B. Kaushal didn’t let any one of us face the music. He went and took responsibility,” he adds. A rare figure, according to him, one who gave both operational freedom and support to his force.

A constantly critical lens also means you tend to ignore the nuances, miss the big picture, and overlook the good that is often accomplished silently—and thanklessly. Pasricha says Delhi Police is still better than most state police forces. For one, being in the Capital, it’s always in the limelight. “Delhi Police has always to be on its toes. After Shaheen Bagh, I don’t think it’s even been able to get back to routine work. You had a lockdown. Then the farmers’ protest. They are overstretched, and you have to take the human element into account. They might have gone a bit overboard on one or two cases but not in all cases. In my opinion, they are better sensitised, well-educated and far better,” says the former Mumbai police commissioner. A serving Delhi Police officer too says that, overall, it’s one of the best forces in India. “Yes, there is pressure, but probably in 10 per cent of the cases, those with some political resonance. In the remaining 90 per cent, Delhi Police is independent and works freely. That’s not something you can say about any other police force in India,” he says—and feels they have evaded that danger by not being under a local government.

Moreover, political overlordship is not something new. All governments have been guilty. He cites the example of Baba Ramdev’s 2011 hunger strike at Ramlila grounds during the IAC’s anti-corruption agitation against the UPA. “We had explained to then home minister P. Chidambaram that no action was required and the movement was petering out on its own, but another senior minister convinced the Congress top brass that he should be removed. So a message was sent to the CP (B.K. Gupta) to evict Ramdev in a midnight swoop. Several people were injured in the process,” the police officer recalls.

Something, or somebody, may be getting injured even now—abstract things like image and institutional trust among them. And perhaps diagnosis is the best way to a more wholesome future.

By Bhavna Vij-Aurora and Jeevan Prakash with inputs from Prashant Srivastav