Those police regulations and we

This writer having served in a manifestly regulatory department like police for thirty-one years and claiming no right to pronounce on other jurisdictions, ventures to look at the so-called colonial dimension of the Bengal Police. Central to the understanding of the subject is browsing, at the least, if not reading through the police regulations of Bengal whose initial compilation dates back to 1927. These regulations numbering 1290 and popularly known as PRB, is the essential guidebook for all police functionaries. It is divided into three volumes, the first dealing with the police organisation, its establishment, different police units and their activities etc in 26 chapters, the second detailing the different manuals, forms and registers relevant to police work and the third one containing the index.

Let us now look at some of the above mentioned colonial regulations and examine their relevance or otherwise to the present context.

Behaviour towards the public

Regulation 33 (a) says, "No Police Force can work successfully unless it wins the respect and goodwill of the public and secures its cooperation."

Regulation 33 (b) says, "Rudeness, harshness and brutality are forbidden; and every officer of superior rank must take immediate steps for the punishment of any offenders who come to his notice."

Regulation 33 (c) says, "No officer should be recommended for promotion who habitually disregards the above instructions."

Regulation 33 (d) says, "Every officer, ..... shall be easily accessible.... to Indian gentleman, whether official or non-official and to other respectable persons and shall encourage them to communicate their opinions to him freely."

Regulation 33 (e) says, "Officers responsible for training a probationary Assistant Superintendent shall impress upon him the necessity for showing courtesy ... and teach him how to conduct himself ...."

Are not the above regulations clear and explicit enough about the expected behaviour pattern of the policemen of yesteryears, at least on paper? The colonial masters may not have been as eloquent as the authors of our constitution or the universal declaration of Human Rights but they definitely displayed their fair intent. It was not in so many words.

Improper use of public servants

Regulation 113 says, "The employment of subordinates as if they were an officer's personal servants, for procuring supplies... is prohibited as being an indefensible abuse of authority...."

How serious and earnest are public servants in Bangladesh about not indulging in the above mentioned impropriety? The colonial authority probably understood the sub-continental mindset better and as such forewarned possibly with a view to creating the proper service ethos.

Appreciation of crime

and appraisal

Regulation 118 says, "The great mass of crime consists of offences against property, against which the police can afford a large measure of protection, either directly by regular and efficient patrolling, or indirectly by the exercise of proper surveillance ...". The above direction still holds good and our over-all crime scenario can register substantial improvement if we stick to the above guidelines.

Regulation 119 very rightly says that, "The successful detection of such crime as the police cannot or do not prevent is also of the greatest importance. But an officer will be judged not by the percentage of successes in the investigation and prosecution of offences, which is to some extent a matter of fortune, but by his display of method and intelligence in detection, his general efficiency and keenness, his management of subordinates and above all by his knowledge and control of the local charge committed to him."

Is not the above appreciation a brilliant display of pragmatism in criminal administration and management and an admirable piece of appraisal guideline? The colonial masters were realists.

Use of firearms

Regulation 153 (b) says, that "... Independent firing by individuals on their own is forbidden except when it is justified as being in the exercise of the right of private defence. The responsibility of proving that circumstances invoked the right of private defence will rest upon the individual who fires or gives the order to fire, but provided the action is taken in good faith, that individual has no need to be apprehensive of the outcome of any enquiry."

One can see in the above paragraph the commendable judiciousness combined with the compulsion of acting properly under trying circumstances.

Economy in communication

Regulation 178 says, "In all departmental correspondence, half-margin memorandum shall be used when the reply can be given in a few words..."

Regulation 181 (b) says "The unnecessary use of service portage stamps.... shall be avoided."

Regulation 181 (c) says, "It is forbidden to use official stationery or service stamps for private correspondence or to enclose private correspondence with official communications...."

The above directions are still relevant when seen in the background of the state of our public offices.

Concern for environment and health

Regulation 203 says, "A police station should be a pattern of order and cleanliness both inside and out. There should be a place for everything and the officer-in-charge shall be held responsible that everything is in its place.... The compound shall be kept tidy and free from jungle by the constables, and hollows and depressions which hold water shall be filled up .... The officer-in-charge shall also see that his subordinates mend any holes that may have been made in their mosquito nets and that they look after their clothing with due care..."

The above paragraph would demonstrate that nearly 100 years ago there was a praiseworthy eco-consciousness and concern for the well being of the human body.

Avoidance of harassment of the public

Regulation 260 says, "Investigating officers should carefully abstain from causing unnecessary harassment either to the parties or to the people generally. Only those persons who are likely to assist the enquiry materially should be summoned to attend. Where possible the investigating officer should himself go to the house of the witness to be examined. The proceedings should be as informal as possible. The questioning of witnesses should ordinarily be conducted apart and in a manner that will not be distasteful to them."

The present day investigators have a lot to learn from the above directives if they and their superiors are earnest in projecting a desirable image of the service in public estimation.

Avoidance of unnecessary arrest and granting of bail

Regulation 317 says, "The police shall be careful to abstain from unnecessary arrests. In petty cases it is hardly ever necessary to arrest on suspicion during the course of an enquiry, and never necessary to arrest after the enquiry is over, when the case is not to be sent up...." "A free use shall be made of the discretion given by section 497(2) of the code of criminal procedure, to accept bail in non-bail able cases....."

The above regulation while telling the police not to hesitate to arrest on suspicion, clearly reminds them that only "reasonable suspicion" will justify the arrest and that if there is no "responsible grounds for believing in his guilt" such arrest should be at once followed by an offer of release on bail under section 497(2) of the code. The exercise of such discretion relating to bail by police, at present, is almost non-existent for reasons that may be discussed but the redeeming feature that cannot escape our attention is that police was expected to be active but responsible. Human liberty and freedom was taken into consideration by the colonial rulers.

Use of handcuffs

Regulation 330 says, ".... The use of handcuffs or rope is often an unnecessary indignity. In no case shall women be handcuffed, nor shall restrain be used to those who either by age or infirmity are easily and securely kept in custody."

The above regulation shows the sensitivity and admirable caution of the colonial rulers and are without doubt worth emulating.

Many more regulations could be cited but only a few have been discussed keeping in mind their universal applicability and their being free from any controversy. From the foregoing discussions and the comments made hereinbefore one point becomes clear -- that the so-called colonial rulers were pragmatic and circumspect and that they could think ahead of their times. They were good managers and the regulations crafted by them are still in the book and as such binding on the police officials who serve now.

So what has gone wrong to make the general public feel less-than-comfortable in their dealings with police? One view is that those police regulations have not been followed in letter and deeds and there has been very little effort to improve upon them. Adhocism has reigned supreme and lamentably there has been very little scope to fulfil the organisational need and introduce a strategic plan. The professionals and the politicians have not worked in unison. The managers could not be groomed properly.

Muhammad Nurul Huda is former IGP and Secretary to the Government.