Yogi Adityanath Government and DGP Controversy (Supreme Court, Prakash Singh Ruling)
In the last two months, we have been witnessing political agitation in more than half a dozen states over the appointment and functioning of the largest police officer – the DGP. Once the government changes, from east to west, from the northern electoral states, you will find examples of departures of the old DGP, conflicts over new appointments and the controversial role of the largest post in the police department. southward.
You may recall that two weeks ago, the Election Commission removed Anurag Gupta, the deputy director general of the electoral state Jharkhand. The reason is said to be his controversial history. In this way, the Election Commission yesterday transferred Maharashtra DGP Rashmi Shukla. Opposition parties in Maharashtra are against Rashmi Shukla’s working style. Yesterday, when news of Rashmi Shukla’s departure broke, the Yogi Adityanath government was formulating new rules for selecting the deputy CM of Uttar Pradesh. This would increase the power of the state by reducing the role of the center in elections.
Is the central government’s intervention in selection limited now?
The Uttar Pradesh cabinet yesterday approved new rules for the selection and appointment of deputy director general in the state. Under this provision, the deputy attorney general of Uttar Pradesh will now be appointed by a committee, which will be headed by a retired high court judge. Apart from this, the committee will also have the state chief secretary, nominated member of UPSC, chairman or nominated member of the Union Public Service Commission of Uttar Pradesh, additional chief secretary or principal secretary, home department and retired DGP.
The committee will elect a permanent DGP. His term is 2 years. While selecting the DGP, the committee will consider the list of officials who have at least 6 months remaining in their term. These 6 months are calculated from the date of vacancy. Another thing is that if the DGP needs to be cancelled, then a decision will be taken based on the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in this regard.
The question is how the early DGP was selected. In fact, while selecting the DGP, the government so far has sent the UPSC the list of senior police officers who have served in the police department for 30 years and have at least 6 months remaining in their tenure. After brainstorming the names of these officers, the UPSC (Union Public Service Commission) used to forward three names to the state government. One of them was appointed as DGP. But now this will happen only in Lucknow. The UPSC, which used to approve the last three names, has now filled these names in the new committee.
Delhi vs Lucknow? Government and opposition face to face!
Akhilesh Yadav, a representative of the political opposition in Uttar Pradesh, ridiculed the new Yogi system of government and called it “Delhi meets Lucknow”. Akhilesh posted on social media – I heard that a new arrangement has been made for a senior officer to be given a permanent post… The question is whether the person who made this new arrangement himself will stay in office for two years Year? Is this an attempt to displace Delhi itself into power? Delhi vs Lucknow 2.0
And the stand of the Yogi government is that they are framing the new rules keeping in mind the Supreme Court’s judgment of September 22, 2006. The Supreme Court later said that the state government should frame a new police law to enable the police system to function without any pressure, thus protecting the rights of citizens and establishing the rule of law. The purpose of the new rules of the state government is to elect the DGP in a fair and transparent system.
Prakash Singh – What happened to what the Supreme Court said 18 years ago?
The Yogi government in Uttar Pradesh today cited the Supreme Court ruling. She told him on her face that he only came here in 2006. Is the government really implementing this decision honestly?
In fact, a man named Prakash Singh served as a senior police officer in the Indian Police Service for a long time. Apart from the Uttar Pradesh Police, he is also the Deputy Inspector General of Police of Assam. After his retirement, he petitioned the Supreme Court in 1996. In this petition, there are calls for reforms to the police department.
In September 2006, the Supreme Court issued a historic decision on this issue. In the decision, the country’s top court asked all state and union territory governments to reform their police departments. In this decision, some guidelines were given so that the police can carry out their work without political pressure.
Among the seven important guidelines, the most important ones concern the appointment, selection and tenure of the Deputy Director-General. 18 years ago, the court had made it clear that a retiring police officer should not be appointed as DGP for a period of 2 years so that any politician can transfer him anytime and so can the police. The department cannot transfer him.
But did it happen? You will find numerous examples of states and their Supreme Court decisions being ignored. The Supreme Court is also hearing a petition regarding the matter.
This has been the case in more than a half-dozen states appointing interim attorneys general. Interestingly, the Uttar Pradesh government itself has goals in this regard. The petition states that many states including Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, Telangana, Punjab, Bihar, Rajasthan and West Bengal are establishing a new habit of appointing interim attorneys general .
If we talk about Uttar Pradesh, four interim DGPs have been made in the last two years. First – Devendra Singh Chauhan was appointed as DGP from May 2022 to March 2023. Thereafter, Rajkumara Vishwakarma served as the DGP of UP for only two months between April and May 2023. He was followed by IPS officer Vijay Kumar. Kumar will serve as Deputy Director General from June 2023 to January 2024. After him, Prashant Kumar serves as DGP from February 2024.
There is also controversy over Prashant Kumar that when he was appointed, he was appointed as DGP of the state despite being ranked 19th in the list of senior officers. The question is, does the new Yogi government committee really follow the 2006 decision? Time will tell whether the controversy over the interim appointment of Prashant Kumar and other DGPs will cease with the formation of the new committee or escalate further.
