By Archita Singh Paliwal, BALLB Hons VII Semester, University of Allahabad
KEYWORDS
Police Reform, Custodial Torture, Bias in Policing, Caste Discrimination, Islamophobia, Accountability, Rule of Law, Criminal Justice System , Common Cause, Lokniti-CSDS
ABSTRACT
The “Status of Policing in India Report 2025” (SPIR 2025), authored by Common Cause and Lokniti-CSDS, presents a comprehensive examination of the persistent biases, operational flaws, and challenges inherent in the Indian police system. Drawing on inputs from over 8,000 police personnel and diverse stakeholders, the report uncovers alarming trends such as justification of custodial torture, normalization of caste and religious prejudices, preference for extrajudicial measures, and disregard for due process and accountability. The study lays bare the structural and attitudinal defects that undermine the police’s role as protectors of constitutional values and human rights. This article aims to critically analyze the findings of SPIR 2025, contextualize its implications for law and society, and propose reforms for a rights-respecting, accountable police force.
INTRODUCTION
Policing, the frontline institution of the criminal justice system, wields significant influence over public safety, social justice, and the rule of law in India. The police’s legitimacy, ethical conduct, and operational impartiality are foundational to democracy and constitutional order. However, the annual “Status of Policing in India Report 2025” brings forth inconvenient truths about the structural and attitudinal defects embedded in Indian policing.
Despite decades of calls for reform, India’s police force remains characterized by political interference, inadequate resources, lack of diversity, limited accountability, and entrenched prejudice. The SPIR 2025 — produced by the collaborative efforts of Common Cause (India) and Lokniti-CSDS — delivers a nuanced analysis across parameters such as torture in custody, caste and religious discrimination, operational biases, attitudes towards violence, and compliance with constitutional safeguards.
This article delves into the findings and methodology of SPIR 2025, scrutinizes the manifestation of bias and flaws in contemporary policing, and explores the way forward for meaningful police reform.
METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE OF SPIR 2025
The SPIR uses a robust methodology combining face-to-face surveys, in-depth interviews, and analysis of official records from agencies such as the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). For the 2025 edition, over 8,276 police personnel were surveyed across 82 locations in 17 states, alongside interviews with judges, doctors, and lawyers. The report investigates parameters such as public trust, police excesses, discrimination against vulnerable sections, working conditions, and the impact of social identities (religion, caste) on police attitudes.
KEY FINDINGS: BIAS & FLAWS IN INDIAN POLICING
1. Justification and Prevalence of Torture and Violence
Normalization of Torture: Over 30% of police personnel justify the use of third-degree methods against accused individuals in serious criminal cases. This justification often stems from a belief in dispensing “justice” directly and a perception of the public expecting aggressive law enforcement.
Support for Extrajudicial Measures: 22% endorse the use of extrajudicial killings for “dangerous criminals;” nearly 28% believe India’s criminal justice system is too weak, thus favoring such summary methods.
Acceptance of Minor Punishments: Two out of five officers believe police should administer “minor punishment” for small offences, bypassing legal trial procedures.
2. Caste Bias and Discrimination
Entrenched Prejudice: The report and complementary studies highlight a disturbing overrepresentation of Dalits and Adivasis in custodial violence and incarceration, fueled by deep-seated biases in police institutions.
Case Studies: Incidents from Bihar reveal how dominant caste officials collude to deny justice, resist legal aid efforts, and perpetuate violence against marginalized groups. Structural inequalities of caste, class, and gender, which exist in society, are replicated within the prison system.
Structural Impact: Discrimination extends beyond police actions to courtrooms and legal aid systems, resulting in denial of fair representation for marginalized communities.
3. Islamophobia and Religious Bias
Anti-Muslim Stereotyping: A significant proportion of police personnel hold the belief that Muslims are “naturally inclined” towards committing crimes, with this bias particularly pronounced in states like Delhi, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharashtra, West Bengal, and Jharkhand.
Targeted Violence: Anti-Muslim prejudice manifests in police support for mob punishment, especially in “cow slaughter” cases in certain states.
Torture Techniques: Reports indicate targeted torture methods against Muslims accused of terrorism, designed to humiliate and intimidate based on religious identity.
4. Disregard for Rule of Law and Accountability
Non-Compliance with Arrest Procedures: Widespread disregard for lawful arrest and detention protocols is reported, with officers favoring unchecked powers over judicial and public oversight.
Data Discrepancies: Official reports show underreporting and inconsistency in custodial death statistics. In 2020, NCRB reported 76 deaths, NHRC reported 90, while NCAT documented 111 — with many deaths linked to torture.
Resistance to Oversight: . Majority of police officials believe that the public complaints against the police are “false and frivolous”, undermining accountability mechanisms
5. Institutional and Systemic Challenges
Political Interference: Arbitrary transfers, lack of fixed tenure, and political pressure impede independent policing and meritocratic promotions.
Inadequate Infrastructure: Shortages in manpower, forensic labs, modern surveillance technology, and cybercrime units persist despite reform recommendations.
Gender Imbalance: The force remains heavily male-dominated; recommendations for 33% reservation for women police have seen limited implementation.
ANALYSIS: LEGAL AND SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS
A . CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERNS
The findings of SPIR 2025 point to a persistent and widespread failure within law enforcement agencies to uphold fundamental constitutional guarantees. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution safeguards the right to life and personal liberty, explicitly prohibiting torture and custodial violence. However, the documented cases reveal repeated violations, where custodial deaths and ill-treatment have gone unpunished, eroding the credibility of these protections. Additionally, Articles 14 and 15—ensuring equality before the law and prohibiting discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth—are routinely flouted. Structural biases and discriminatory policing practices disproportionately affect marginalized groups such as Dalits, Adivasis, and Muslims, thereby institutionalizing inequality. Article 22, which mandates procedural safeguards during arrest and detention, is routinely subverted by arbitrary detentions and denial of legal counsel, leading to grave due process violations. Collectively, these breaches not only compromise public trust in law enforcement and the rule of law but also perpetuate a climate of fear and impunity, particularly among vulnerable populations.
B. IMPACT ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE OUTCOMES
Institutional bias ingrained in the police system significantly distorts criminal justice outcomes in India. The over-incarceration rates among Dalits, Adivasis, and Muslims indicate that these communities are more likely to be targeted for arrest, often based on prejudiced assumptions rather than concrete evidence. This prejudicial treatment results in higher incidences of wrongful convictions and prolonged pre-trial detentions for these groups, commonly exacerbated by limited access to competent legal representation. The denial of fair trial rights—manifested through coerced confessions, evidentiary manipulation, and lack of judicial scrutiny—fuels a vicious cycle wherein marginalized communities remain trapped in the criminal justice system. Beyond the direct legal consequences, these practices reinforce social exclusion, poverty, and intergenerational trauma, further entrenching marginalization and occasionally provoking retaliatory violence or unrest.
C. NEED FOR ACCOUNTABILITY AND OVERSIGHT
The absence of effective accountability mechanisms remains a central obstacle to reforming police conduct and maintaining the integrity of the justice system. Internal and external oversight bodies—institutional checks designed to investigate misconduct and safeguard rights—are often weak, under-resourced, or compromised. The manipulation of postmortem and forensic reports, sometimes in collusion with medical professionals, reveals how evidence is distorted to shield perpetrators from scrutiny. Reports of police collusion with defense lawyers and the intimidation of doctors who attempt to expose custodial torture illustrate the extent of the impunity. This failure to hold individuals and institutions accountable not only deprives victims and their families of redress but also signals to police officers that abuses will be tolerated or overlooked. Strengthening independent oversight, empowering whistle blowers, and ensuring protection for witnesses and medical professionals are essential to break the current cycle of impunity and restore faith in the justice system.
CRITIQUE OF THE REFORM PROCESS
1. HISTORIC REFORM RECOMMENDATIONS
• Overhauling Colonial Policing Framework:
India’s policing system is still rooted in the Police Act of 1861, a colonial-era law created for control rather than service. Reform measures seek to replace it with a Model Police Act built on three pillars:
▪ Greater accountability to citizens,
▪ Community-driven policing,
▪ Insulation of the police from political interference.
• Supreme Court’s Prakash Singh Guidelines (2006):
The Court mandated key reforms such as:
▪ State Security Commissions to shield police from political pressure,
▪ Fixed tenures for senior officers to curb arbitrary transfers,
▪ Separation of investigation from law-and-order duties,
▪ Police Establishment Boards to ensure fair postings and promotions,
▪ Independent Complaints Authorities to address misconduct.
• Committee Recommendations
▪ National Police Commission (1977–81):Professionalism, citizen accountability, fixed tenures.
▪ Ribeiro Committee (1998): Independent oversight and modern training.
▪ Padmanabhaiah Committee (2000): Emphasis on community policing and decentralization.
▪ Malimath Committee (2002–03): Strengthening forensics and creating a federal crime agency.
▪ Law Commission (273rd Report, 2017): Anti-torture law and stronger custodial safeguards.
▪ However, patchy implementation and policy inertia continue to undermine these recommendations.
2. MODERNIZATION & TECHNOLOGY
Advocates call for adoption of “SMART” (Sensitive, Modern, Accountable, Reliable, Tech-enabled) policing — integrating digital case management, forensic expertise, CCTV surveillance, and regular training in evidence-based investigation.
3. COMMUNITY POLICING AND INCLUSION
Models like Kerala’s Janamaithri Suraksha and Maharashtra’s Mohalla Committees demonstrate the potential of community engagement to bridge trust deficits. However, nationwide scaling and sustained engagement remain lacking.
FORWARD PATH: RECOMMENDATIONS from SPIR 2025 AND ALLIED REPORTS
Fast-Track Recruitment and Increased Funding: To address personnel shortages and workload stress.
Legal Reforms: Replace Police Act 1861 with Model Police Act 2006, ensure legal protection against torture, and expedite pending cases involving Dalits, Adivasis, and Muslims.
Infrastructure Modernization: Leverage AI-based policing tools, advanced data analytics, and drone monitoring to enhancecrime prevention and control.
Broaden the scope of the Modernization of Police Forces (MPF) program by investing in surveillance systems like CCTV, establishing forensic laboratories, deploying GPS-enabled patrol vehicles, and equipping personnel with body cameras.
Strengthen cybercrime departments in line with the Padmanabhaiah Committee’s recommendations, while also enforcing the NHRC’s 2021 mandate on installing night-vision CCTV cameras in police stations to ensure greater transparency and accountability.
Data Transparency: Standardized and independent reporting mechanisms for custodial deaths and incidents of torture.
Ensuring Autonomy and Depoliticization: Implement the State Security Commission (SSC) to protect police from political interference, as recommended by the National Police Commission.
Empower the Police Establishment Board (PEB), per the Ribeiro Committee, to manage transfers and promotions independently.
Replace the outdated Police Act, 1861 with the Model Police Act (2006) to ensure legal backing for reforms.
Specialization and Functional Division: The Malimath Committee emphasized the need to separate investigative duties from law-and-order responsibilities, proposing the creation of a dedicated investigative cadre for complex cases.
The committee further suggested allowing confessions before senior police officers to be considered valid evidence, provided strong safeguards are in place to prevent coercion.
Community Policing and Inclusion: Models like Kerala’s Janamaithri Suraksha and Maharashtra’s Mohalla Committees demonstrate the potential of community engagement to bridge trust deficits. However, nationwide scaling and sustained engagement remain lacking.
Gender Sensitization: Implement 33% reservation for women in police, all-women police stations in each district, and female presence in all stations.
Mandate gender sensitization training and provide supportive facilities to improve retention.
Judicial Coordination and Reform: Digitize FIRs, link police records with e-courts, and fast-track undertrial cases as recommended by the Malimath Committee.
Appoint liaison officers and expand plea bargaining to cut delays and ensure timely justice.
Capacity Building: Set up a Police Training Advisory Council (PTAC) to modernize training with focus on forensics, human rights, and technology. Include soft skills and citizen interface modules.
Encourage higher education through scholarships and enable cross-agency training with CBI, NIA, and IB for professional growth
Human Rights Training: Ongoing education for police officers on constitutional rights, interrogation techniques, and prevention of torture.
Community and Social Worker Integration: Incorporate psychologists, counselors, and social workers into police stations for sensitive case handling.
CONCLUSION
The “Status of Policing in India Report 2025” indicts Indian policing for persistent bias, disregard for rule of law, and institutional flaws that violate the spirit of constitutional governance and social justice. As India advances toward becoming an inclusive democracy, the imperative to reform policing gains urgency. Law students, practitioners, and policy makers alike must amplify the call for evidence-based, rights-respecting, and inclusive police practices.
Comprehensive reforms—rooted in accountability, modern training, community engagement, and data-driven oversight—are imperative. Policymakers, civil society, and the judiciary must collaborate to transform policing in India, ensuring that the police act as true guardians of a just and inclusive society.
True reform will require more than new laws and technology — it demands a radical shift in institutional culture, attitudes, and the distribution of power within the justice system. Only then can the police fulfil its promise as guardian of rights and pillar of democracy.
REFERENCES
