On the 80th anniversary of Independence, an uncomfortable truth has to be stated plainly: India is steadily moving away from functioning as the normative democracy that the founding fathers had envisioned in August 1947.

Yes, citizens vote, despite deep misgivings about the integrity of the electoral process, and elect a party to office in the elusive hope that it will govern with responsibility and empathy.

Post elections, when citizens step out to demand that their grievances be heard, the state’s Pavlovian reflex is not objective dialogue in Parliament, nor a hearing in a committee room. It is barricades, prohibitory orders, and the lathi.

Retired Civil Servants' Concern

That was the core sentiment of a letter written in late July by the Constitutional Conduct Group, CCG — a body of eminent retired civil servants, including a former National Security Advisor and a former Home Secretary. The trigger for the missive was the Delhi Police crackdown at Jantar Mantar in the third week of July. 

As the CCG noted in its statement, the use of force against peaceful protesters signals "a disturbing departure from constitutional norms and democratic practice". When retired civil servants who have served successive governments feel compelled to write such letters, it tells you something about the decay  of institutional dialogue.

The context is instructive. Members of the Cockroach Janata Party, CJP, along with students and parents protesting NEET irregularities, had been sitting at Jantar Mantar for over a month. On July 20, as Parliament’s Monsoon Session began, they announced a march to Parliament. Delhi Police responded by invoking Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — BNSS, the new name for Section 144 CrPC. 

Despite restrictions on  TV coverage,  what followed was captured in footage that caused nationwide dismay and anger. Callous security forces personnel, iron barricades, tear gas, and lathi charges. Protesters were dragged out of autos, far away from the protest site and there were gruesome images of women being beaten. 

'Police Needs a New Protocol

The Supreme Court, hearing petitions on July 28, observed: “The police need a new protocol during agitations,” pointing out that earlier laid-down guidelines had not been followed. A video of Additional DCP Sandeep Lamba slapping a woman protester went viral and triggered demands for accountability.

Parliament was unable to discuss this matter but civil society has flagged it. The CCG letter is to be commended for candidly articulating the collective anguish: that the government does not find it necessary to address citizen grievances till they pour out into the street. Nor are they discussed in Parliament. And when they do spill over, the response is brutalization, not engagement. That is not democracy but management by coercion.

The deeper malaise is not about one protest, or one party. It is about the architecture of policing that India inherited in August 1947 and never dismantled.

The Indian Police Act of 1861 was crafted to suppress the colonial subject and serve the imperial interest. That DNA is visible every time Section 163 is used across the country as a blanket ban, most recently across the New Delhi district. Citizen grievances cannot be aired since prior permission to assemble becomes prior censorship. And where the police are culpable of transgressions, accountability is postponed till “an inquiry is ordered.” 

Concerned citizens have suggested reforms for 30 years — but in vain. In 1996, former Director General of Police (DGP) Prakash Singh filed a petition that led to the Supreme Court’s 2006 judgment laying down specific directives: fixed tenure for DGPs, a Police Establishment Board, a Police Complaints Authority at state and district level, and separation of investigation from law and order. The goal was simple: a police that is professional, accountable, and citizen-friendly.

Almost no state has implemented it in spirit. Compliance exists on paper and tenures are still hostage to political preferences. The lathi remains the default tool of crowd control. Guidelines laid down after Ramlila Maidan and other cases are routinely ignored, as the CJI noted in July.

Criminality has entered the body politic in myriad ways and the nexus between politics and crime was reviewed after the 1993 Mumbai blasts. Then Home Secretary N.N. Vohra submitted a report in October 1993 to the government that warned of the criminalization of politics and the politicization of crime. 

The Vohra Committee studied the problem of the nexus among criminals, politicians and bureaucrats. It contained observations by official agencies on a criminal network "virtually running a parallel government". It also discussed criminal gangs who enjoyed the patronage of politicians "of all parties" and the protection of government functionaries. The report revealed that political leaders had become leaders of gangs. The full report was never made public, and its annexures are still classified.

Thirty-three years later, that nexus has not weakened. If anything, it has been institutionalized. It explains why most crimes go unpunished — and in many cases, it is the innocent who are penalized for seeking justice. Genuine protest is treated as a law-and-order problem to be contained, not a democratic signal to be heard.

The result is a police that is feared but not trusted — one that beats protesters at Jantar Mantar and then files FIRs against them for unlawful assembly. A state machinery that uses internet shutdowns, hospital security cordons, and preventive detentions to manage dissent.

Police Reforms Imperative

Citizen advocacy must focus on police reforms and three elements  are central. First, enact the Prakash Singh directives fully. Give the Police Complaints Authority teeth and independence. Give officers security of tenure so they can say no to illegal political orders. Separate investigation from law and order so that a protester is not automatically treated as a criminal. Without this, every DGP remains a transferable officer at the mercy of the ruling party.

Second, replace the colonial SOP for protests. One that presumes the right to protest as a constitutional right, not a concession. That designates multiple sites in every city, not just Jantar Mantar. That mandates dialogue before baton, and body cameras and name tags for all personnel in crowd control. And that punishes officers who use disproportionate force. 

A DCP slapping a young woman with impunity cannot be the benchmark. The SC is right: India  needs a new protocol for agitations, collated from all existing judgments.

Third, take the Vohra Report seriously again. India cannot have a humane police in a system where political protection of criminality is ballot currency. Electoral autocracy thrives when institutions are hollowed out. Strengthening police accountability is also about cleaning politics — about ending the culture of giving tickets and offering garlands to those accused of serious crimes. Until the Vohra Committee’s recommendations on a nodal agency and fast-track action against the crime-politics-bureaucracy nexus are implemented, the police will remain a partisan force.

Eighty years ago India lowered the Union Jack and raised the tricolor. It did not, however, lower the 1861 Police Act. It was amended and sections renamed but the colonial DNA remained in place: that the citizen is a subject to be controlled, not an empowered  rights bearer to be heard.

This is why Section 163 is used like a switch. This is why internet shutdowns are normalized. This is why hospitals are turned into security zones. This is why retired civil servants have to write letters to remind the executive of the Constitution.

If the 80th anniversary is to be meaningful  it should mean : no more lathi-wielding as first response. No more treating Parliament as optional and the street as dangerous. No more compelling citizens to risk a beating to be heard.

A democracy that cannot hear its people without beating them is veering towards electoral autocracy.

Let August 15 this year be the day that India resolutely reforms its police as an empathetic institution for its citizens. The tricolor deserves a police force that protects it, not one that inherited the Raj’s imperial  reflexes.

Making Freedom Real

The choice before us on this 80th Independence Day is stark. We can celebrate freedom with flag hoisting, slogans  and speeches. Or we can begin the harder work of making that freedom real in the daily encounter between Citizen and State. 

The police are where that encounter happens. It is time they internalized  the spirit of the tricolour and the spirit of August 1947. 

(The author is an Indian Navy veteran and a strategic analyst. The views expressed are personal)