& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Agency of criminal justice system: A historical review

SHEIKH HAFIZUR RAHMAN KARZON
THE history of organised police system is not a story of far back. It developed hand in hand with the development of urbanisation and industrialisation. Theoretically the police system is said to have originated for the wellbeing of the commoners, but in depth studies revealed that police, as a regimented force, always safeguards the interests of upper echelon of society. The corruption of police is not normal phenomenon of the third world countries, once Edwin H Sutherland, famous sociologist, wrote 'politician-police-criminal' triumvirate were operative in the American states. The history of police in Bangladesh is inextricably related to the history of the police system of Indian sub-continent. In this write-up I try to focus the origin, and character of police in Bangladesh.
History of Police System in Indian Sub-Continent and Bangladesh
Police was prevalent in the ancient India. In old epics like Ramayana and Mahabharata there are references as to the existence of police organisation. Manu said that people having good knowledge of local area should be appointed as police, who will better administer law and order situation. In India there were two different systems of police, one for rural areas, another for urban areas. During Maurya Gupta and Mughal period the duality of police system continued. Imperial powers did not take the direct responsibility of the rural areas to ensure law and order situation there. The local landowner or the village headman was entrusted to keep the village order. Theoretically they were made accountable to subordinate officers of the empire, but the authority was not effectively practised. 2
The imperial governments had g
strong police system in cities where Kotwal was the head of the police administration. Although Kotwal started working from the Mauryan time, but description of their activities during Mughal period is available. During the Mughal period crime and disorder were kept under the control by the Village PanChayates. The urban centres had their own police set-up called the Kotwali system that functioned till the 19th century. Kotwal had to dispose of many fuctions of the modern police. Kotwal was to maintain night patrolling, serveillance over visitors, spies, and migrants, to arrest criminals, to see the prisons, and to eliminate prostitution and consumption of alcohol. The post of Kotwal was so powerful that it created wide opportunity to abuse power and take bribery. The Kotwal was pictured as oppressive, ruthless and arbitrary. It reminds typical character of police as being oppres-
sive, which was so before 500 years ago and still it is the characteristic trait of police.
In addition to crime control and maintenance of order, Kotwal was chief intelligence officer of the monarch. As king's principal spy Kotwal held enormous power and when exercising the power arbitrarily tortured common people of different strata. This torture was the first legacy of police.
After coming to India and getting administrative power, British rulers were interested in collecting land revenue, and for that purpose started setting up police organisations. Crime control and maintenance of order was not the foremost task of police, their most important obligation was to help the revenue authorities to collect land revenue . For that reason police was controlled by the revenue authorities and functioned till today under the authority of Collector in the
districts. When extracting land revenue police widely practised torture. Thus torture became second legacy of police as an official practice.
The British Governor of Madras appointed a Torture Commission in 1854 and entrusted to look into the aggravated danger of torture and recommend ways how to eliminate it. As a result of the recommendations, torture by revenue officials diminished and gradually went away. The Commission was very spectacular in that it recommended to separate revenue and police functions, to make third degree (police torture) a criminal offence and to make a confessional statement to a police officer totally inadmissible as evidence. In spite of the recommendations of far reaching changes, police torture did not wither away. In addition to legacies of history, the excessive criminality of the 18th and 19th centuries
seemed to have made torture inevitable part of the police culture of Indian sub-continent.
The East India Company did not touch the existing police system up to 1792. Lord Cornwallis introduced a new police system in 1792 responsible to the Company. Under the dispensation of the new system a post of Darogha was created in every district and he was made responsible to the District Judge. Daroghas were entrusted to see the landowners and headmen policing the villages. Darogha system failed to supervise the village police and it was abrogated in the three presidencies, Calcutta, Bombay and Madras, in 1814. This time indigenous village police system was reintroduced. Under the new system Collectors were made responsible for the law and order situation of the districts. In spite of the abolition of Darogha system the situation did not improve, rather the situation became chaotic gave rise to dacoity and insecurity of the citizens.
Charles Napier conquered Sindh in 1843. Following the Royal Irish constabulary as model he introduced a separate police organisation directed by its own officers. An Inspector General of Police was the chief of the whole province with a Superintendent of police in each district. Government had the responsibility of law and order through its Collectors, but police administration was entrusted to a new and specific department. The model was later on introduced in other provinces and it provides the basic structure of police in Bangladesh and India.
Before 1857 this was the situation of police system in this subcontinent. After the great mutiny of 1857 the British Crown directly took the responsibility of India in 1858. The British rulers were bewildered at the wide-spread mutiny in 1857 in all over India. After controlling the mutiny they thought to reorganise the whole criminal justice system of Indian sub-continent. The British
rulers enacted the Indian Penal Code in 1860 and the Criminal Procedure Code in 1861. With this two criminal Codes in their hands they, then, required a Police Code for the execution of the criminal law. The government appointed a Police Commission in 1860 and when implementing the recommendations of the Commission the government enacted the Police Act, 1861.
The organisation of police was established according to the provisions of this Act, which continues to regulate the police functions still today in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan.
Immediately after establishing police, British rulers realised that successive enquiries found the police incompetent, high-handed, and corrupt. In 1902, just about 40 years later, the Fraser Commission concluded that, the police system established by the British rulers had completely failed. It recorded that, "Everywhere they went, the Commission heard the most bitter complaints against the corruption of the police. These complaints were not made by non-officials only, but also by officials of all classes including Magistrates and Police Officers, both European and native." One may be surprised by seeing that even today after more than 100 years later corruption and police still go hand in hand!
In spite of lot of criticism, alternative of police system is yet to be discovered. Though many pre-literate societies have existed without any formal police system, but it is an important agency of criminal justice system of any country having urban centres. It operates with a broad mandate of crime control and maintenance of order. The existing police system of Bangladesh should be vivisected for recasting a better law and order-maintaining agency suited with the needs of 21st century.