Revision as of 17:29, 24 February 2016

Delhi Police: i) Number of employees; ii) IPC crimes registered, 2012-15; Graphic courtesy: The Times of India, January 22, 2016

Delhi Police vis-à-vis Mumbai Police on social media, as in Jan 2016; Graphic courtesy: The Times of India, January 28, 2016

Who controls Delhi Police?

The Times of India

Before 1947, Delhi Police was a part of Punjab Police

In 1948, it got an IGP — D W Mehra

The post of commissioner of police was instituted in 1978. J N Chaturvedi was the first CP

Earlier, the IGP reported to the Delhi chief secretary. Now, the CP reports to the lieutenant governor of National Capital Territory

The reporting structure of Delhi Police is complex. MHA exercises overarching control But the Union home secretary and LG jointly supervise the force

The background

Solution May Lie In Devolving Some Powers To State

Manoj Mitta | TNN

The Times of India

New Delhi: Ever since the Delhi assembly came into existence in 1993, both Congres and BJP have been clamouring for full statehood for the national capital. Arvind Kejriwal’s dharna and his partial success on Tuesday in pushing the Centre to yield to some of his demands against the police have served to highlight a constitutional anomaly about Delhi.

In their political rhetoric, Congres, BJP and AAP all agree on doing away with the anomaly of Delhi Police being outside the administrative control of the capital’s elected government.

This lacuna in the jurisdiction of the national capital’s government is why Delhi is not considered a state despite having an assembly and a CM. The stalemate has remained unresolved despite different models available in other national capitals to balance democratic and security exigencies (see graphic).

Unlike its counterparts in states, the Delhi assembly is barred by Article 239AA(3)(a) of the Constitution from making laws on three of the 66 state list entries. The three subjects that do not apply to the Delhi assembly — and therefore the Delhi government — are Entries 1, 2 and 18 dealing with public order, police and land.

The sensitivity of the situation can be gauged from the fact that even when the NDA government made an abortive bid in 2003 to confer statehood on Delhi, the Bill introduced by L K Advani steered clear of Entries 1 and 2 that deal with the city’s security.

As a corollary, the Delhi Police commissioner reports to the Lt Governor, who in turn discharges functions relating to public order and police with Union home ministry’s concurrence. This means that when there is a law and order breakdown, the Delhi CM can only demand action against errant police officials, as Kejriwal did through his dharna. However grave the provocation, the CM cannot suspend or transfer any policeman.

Tthe peculiarity of Delhi is evident from the special exemption enjoyed by Lutyens Delhi, the seat of India’s government, from the constitutional obligation of having an elected municipality. In this prime area where Kejriwal held his dharna and which constitutes 3% of Delhi, the centre owns most of the land and 80% of buildings. Hence, the conventional pattern of representative local self-government was found unworkable. The New Delhi Municipal Council is essentially nominated by the Union government.

The larger context in which the Delhi government took to the streets was the failure across the country to implement the 2006 SC judgment mandating reforms to insulate police from illegal political interference and to make them accountable to independent watchdog bodies. While most states have disregarded the verdict, the Centre has not so far enacted a fresh law which would have introduced police reforms in Delhi. This is despite a model Bill proposed by the Soli Sorabjee Committee in 2006.

History: how Delhi city lost control over its police

Centre firmed its grip on cops with orders, not laws

Abhinav Garg TNN The Times of India

Arvind Kejriwal is not the first chief minister of Delhi to demand the state’s control over its police. The Centre’s first move to take away much of the city’s influence over Delhi Police in 1996 drew noisy protests from the BJP government at the time. The Sheila Dikshit government was also vociferous in demanding control over the 85,000-strong force but meekly submitted to the Centre’s 2011 decision to deprive it of all remaining powers. TOI traces the history of this ‘takeover’ through a trail of documents accessed from the Delhi government.

The papers show that until 2011, the lieutenant governor and the city government’s finance department had a say in police’s budgetary allocation. But in early 2011, the home ministry unilaterally attached police’s budget to its grants. It also blamed the state’s public works department (PWD) for dragging projects and ordered that a PSU like NBCC be awarded police-related construction work. The ministry took these decisions unilaterally through executive orders, without much discussion with the local government and the Centre.

Early in 1996, the MHA had taken away Delhi Police’s budget from the city government and laid down modalities for its separate accounting. It reshuffled existing arrangements by making Delhi administration’s accountants—maintaining Delhi Police accounts—report to it. The state government responded with a note. Principal secretary (finance), P S Baidwan, pushed for keeping Delhi government’s stake in finalizing the police budget saying it is “essential to monitor the expenditure and also it will help in scrutinizing various proposals in their proper perspective”. He pointed out that Delhi Police was not created under powers conferred in the ‘union’ list of subjects, unlike CRPF or BSF, but owed its existence to a schedule in the ‘state’ list, and hence should not be controlled by MHA. The correct constitutional position, he said, would be “for MHA to provide funds to the LG to administer the reserved items within his delegated powers”.

The note prompted then chief secretary P V Jaikrishnan to issue an office order in September 1996 forming a ‘standing finance committee’ with the police commissioner and the finance secretary as members for Delhi Police’s budget, maintaining the Delhi administration’s influence in police affairs. The matter was given a quiet burial with MHA acknowledging Jaikrishnan’s order.

For the next 15 years, the tenuous arrangement held firm, with the LG and Delhi government both having a say in police proposals, expenditure, modernization plans, etc. However, in July 2011 the MHA brought police’s pay and accounts under its chief controller of accounts. Delhi’s finance department again protested and sought a review but MHA succeeded in gaining full control. In a meeting chaired by then joint secretary (UT) K K Pathak, the ministry conveyed to the state government its decision to take control of the police budget.

By April 2012, the MHA ended Delhi government’s remaining influence. The state would no longer approve police modernization projects nor sanction money for them. Instead, MHA would be the sole arbiter for technical and administrative approvals.

Delhi’s cabinet minister Manish Sisodia accused the Centre of systematically conspiring to take full control of Delhi Police in the past 2-3 years. “Despite being included in the state list, Delhi Police has been taken over by MHA. For this, an amendment in the Constitution of India is required but it has been effected by executive orders by joint secretary-level officers. The illegality was possible because there were Congres governments at the Centre and in Delhi. We demand a new Delhi Police Act to place police under the state government’s full control,”

2015: Recruitment of constables

The Times of India, Oct 30 2015

One constable for every 262 Delhiites

Delhi Police, one of the largest metropolitan police forces in the world with a sanctioned strength of around 72,000, is likely to recruit more than 15,000 additional personnel in a major boost to its manpower. The Union home ministry is working on a proposal to sanction the additional posts which would translate to at least a 20% increase in numbers and would be the biggest expansion of the Del hi Police. Women are likely to get a third of these posts. “As part of its initiative to improve policing in the capital, the ministry proposes to recruit 15,000-20,000 consta bles into the Delhi Police over a period of time. The Cabinet note is being drafted and will be put up for approv al soon,“ a home ministry official told. According to data from the Bureau of Police Research and Development, Delhi Police had a sanctioned strength of 72,686 personnel (civil and district armed police) as on January 1, 2014. It far exceeds the national average in terms of population per policeman. As against one constable for every 262 Delhiites, the national average stands at one policeman for 716 persons. The Delhi Police also beats all other metropolitan police forces in India in terms of manpower. As compared to 72,686 sanctioned strength of civil police in Delhi, Mumbai has just 48,969 policemen and Kolkata 22,834 policemen. There are 11 police sub-districts in Delhi, with 181 police stations, 23 out posts and 15 state armed police stations. “The proposal to expand the Delhi Police may be included in the next year's general budget, which will earmark the required funds. The timeline for recruitment of the 15,000 constables is being decided,“ said a home ministry functionary . Union home minister Rajnath Singh has constantly pitched for strengthening the Delhi Police, laying particular stress on making the capital safer for women. The sanctioned strength of constabulary in the Delhi Police, as per BPR&D data, was 18,989 head constables and 39,834 constables (including civil and district armed police) as on January 1, 2014. Each Delhi Police constable has an average 0.02 square kilometer of area under him.

2016: Delhi has 2 law and order zones under 3 officers

The Times of India, Feb 04 2016

The zones that Delhi was divided into for policing purposes in 2016; Graphic courtesy: The Times of India, Feb 04 2016

Rajshekhar Jha

Call it a way to improve enforcement in Delhi or a clever manoeuvre by outgoing Delhi police commissioner B S Bassi, but Delhi has now been divided into two law and order zones under the stewardship of three officers. Two officers of special commissioner rank will have charge of each area and both will report to a third special commissioner, who will, therefore, be the overall law and order chief of the capital. Bassi, who has less than a month till superannuation, gave details of the new arrangement on Wednesday after a two-hour meeting with the officers selected for the new roles. Sources said that S N Shrivastava and Amulya Patnaik, both of them special commissioners (ADG scale), were informed about their new responsibilities. They will report to Deepak Mishra, special commissioner (DG scale), a 1984-batch officer.

Shrivastava will be re sponsible for the north zone, which will include central range (central and north districts), northern range (north-west and outer districts) and eastern range (east and north-east districts). Patnaik will oversee law and order in the south zone, comprising south-eastern range (south and southeast districts), south-western range (west and south-west districts) and New Delhi range (New Delhi district and railways). The law and order unit till date had Mishra at the top, assisted by the joint commissioner of the various ranges.

Both Shrivastava and Patnaik have a reputation for being no-nonsense officers. The former headed the anti-terror unit of the Delhi Police (special cell) for close to three years until his transfer to another unit recently . The latter led the vigilance unit and had infused new life into the virtually dead wing of Delhi Police.

However, a top officer said this was a “temporary arrangement“ and likely to change once the incoming police chief settles down. While admitting the step could ensure better handling of the law and order in the capital, many senior officers also said the decision appeared more to be Bassi's efforts to contain inter-force politics. “That this is a please-all decision is evident from the timing, else why wasn't this done much earlier?“ an officer commented.

Bassi had earlier triggered resentment among the top echelons when he created the post of “senior“ special commissioners to accommodate Dharmendra Kumar, Vimla Mehra and Mishra. Before the lieutenant-governor struck down the “promotions“, Kumar had been given charge of important units like special cell and crime branch, apart from traffic. Mishra was put in charge of law and order, vigilance, armed police and recruitment. The other special commissioners had been asked to report to the trio.