Features of the Model Police Bill

• Superintendence of State Police to vest in the State Government; State Government to exercise superintendence over the police through laying down policies and guidelines, facilitating their implementation, and ensuring that the police professionally performs its task with functional autonomy.
• Appointment of the Director-General of Police by the State Government from amongst three senior-most officers empanelled for the rank. Empanelment to be done by the State Police Board.
• Tenure of a minimum of two years for the Director-General of Police irrespective of the retirement date.
• Security of tenure for key police functionaries.
• District Magistrate to have a coordinating role.
• Initial appointment at Civil Police Officer Grade –II and Sub-Inspector levels.
• Constitution of a State Police Board, headed by the Home Minister. The State Police Board to frame broad policy guidelines for promoting efficient, effective, responsive, and accountable policing by law; prepare panels for appointment of the Director-General of Police; identify performance parameters to evaluate the functioning of the police services and review and evaluate the organizational performance of the police service in the state.
• Constitution of Police Establishment Committee
• Definition of the role, functions, duties and social responsibilities of the police.
• Constitution of a village police system Creation of a State Police Accountability Commission to inquire into public complaints against police.
• Constitution of a District Accountability Authority.

The Commission examined the essential recommendations of the Soli Sorabjee Committee. The Commission agreed with the formulations in the proposed legislation on the grant of functional autonomy, treating the police as a service, underscoring the sound insulation of the service, security of tenure, insistence on the minimum level of infrastructural facilities, and the attempt to lay down a broad charter of duties for the police personnel, etc. While endorsing the general direction indicated by PADC, the Commission agreed that a holistic examination of the functioning of the police and criminal justice system is needed for comprehensive reforms. The PADC Draft Bill advocates ‘One Police Service’ for each state. The Commission agreed that police functions are not performed only by the police. Certain government departments/agencies have already been given police powers. Currently, the state police have been entrusted with the enforcement of so many laws that they are overburdened and cannot devote adequate time to their core functions. Thus, there is a need to reduce this burden by empowering the departmental agencies to enforce their regulations. Similarly, under the Seventy-Third and Seventy Fourth Amendments, local governments would gradually require their enforcement wings. Undoubtedly, the state police would continue to play the central role, but the need for other police services should be recognized, and new services must be created to meet future requirements.

TThe two most essential functions of the police and crime prevention are the investigation of crime and the maintenance of law and order. These two functions are distinct, requiring different capabilities, training, and skills. More importantly, they need other accountability mechanisms and different government supervision degrees. The constitution of the State Police Board, as recommended by the PADC, would give the police the required degree of autonomy. But a separate mechanism should be put in place to insulate crime investigation, evidence gathering, and prosecution from the vagaries of partisan politics. For this purpose, there will have to be a separate police service to deal with the investigation of crimes exclusively with a mechanism to insulate the process from unwarranted interference.