Police with human face

Two seemingly innocuous incidents of recent happening to which I was witness got me thinking on the assumption that we live in a system governed by the Rule of Law. While on the one hand I make a living out of the grandeur of law and the institution of justice; on the other, I often see blatant injustice before my eyes.

Age makes everyone a cynic but the increasing incidents of anarchy by representatives of the system send worrying signals of the credibility of the belief that we live in a system governed by the Rule of Law. When a popular film star got bail within hours of his sentence many social commentators were up in arms complaining at the promptitude. Point taken. Why does this not happen as a matter of course?

To revert to the two incidents: one relates to the police whisking away a young man to the police station for “interrogation”. The Code of Criminal Procedure provides that an investigating officer can summon any person, who he believes has information that would help in the investigation of a crime.

It provides that when the investigating officer seeks production of a document or other thing he may issue summons or a written order requiring attendance. The code also provides that a police officer making an investigation may require attendance of a witness and when so issue orders. In the case that I witnessed, the police whisked away a young man whose telephone calls suggested he was in touch with a lady who had allegedly eloped with a third party.

The police were investigating the crime at the instance of the husband. They not only whiskered away the gentlemen but used abusive language and threatened him that if the information sought was not forthcoming they would not hesitate to physically harm him. The threat was punctuated with explicates that defy printing. In yet another incident, a posse of traffic cops, in exercise of their powers, went about removing small waist side carts and ensured abusive language was in place to reflect their authority.

In the later incident, I am certain that the posse of policemen would justify their action on the grounds that merchants on the footpaths were a hassle to pedestrians. Unfortunately, when small time vendors are summarily evicted from pavements we forget that their livelihood is at stake. The jurist, learned judges and lawyers will talk about Olga Tellis. However, for the guy who sells spinach, tomatoes and onions or the lady who spends a day threading jasmines and chrysanthemums—the face of the police is the signal of crude authority.

There is no denying that the police in this country have an unnameable task. It is however unfortunate that they have an anti-people image. Acts like the once cited above only reiterated the image. Those in higher echelons often take public stances on the need for law enforcing agencies to be people friendly. Either this is a schizophrenic stance or their audit system is demeaningly faulty.

As a country our policy on way side vendors is fighting hard to be juxtaposed alongside the growing culture of malls and supermarkets. It appears that those living on the pavements (or making a living there) are at the mercy of the law enforcement agency. In all their grandeur and power can uproot hope in fraction of a second.

Time to pay homage to Olga Tellis: Rabid dogs in search of stinking meat and cats in search of hungry rats keep them company. They cook and sleep where they ease, for no conveniences are available to them. Their daughters come of age, bathe under the nosy gaze of passersby, unmindful of the feminine sense of bashfulness.

The cooking and washing over, women pick lice from each other's hair. The boys beg. Men folk, without occupation, snatch chains with the connivance of the defenders of law and order; when caught, if at all, they say: Who doesn't commit crimes in this city? Was it not the Bard who said: You take from me my means to live; you take from me my right to live! Please, police us with a human face.

By L Ravichander