The conflict between federalism and policing emerges when law enforcement actions, often influenced by the Centre or rival State governments, encroach upon the constitutionally guaranteed autonomy of States.
About Policing
- Refers: The United Nations defines policing as a broad function that extends beyond mere law and order.
- Scope of Policing: It encompasses preventative functions (stopping crime before it happens), deterrence (creating a fear of consequences), and investigative work (achieving justice after a crime occurs).
- Core Objective: The ultimate objectives of policing are to provide security and ensure justice for victims through a legitimate authority.
Key Legal Concepts in Interstate Policing
- Jurisdiction: Police authority is territorially confined to the jurisdiction of the concerned police station or State; exercise of power beyond this boundary requires legal sanction.
- Interstate Arrest Protocols: Before making an arrest in another state, it is compulsory to inform the local police.
- Additionally, any search or seizure should ideally occur in the presence of two independent local witnesses.
- Transit Remand (CrPC Safeguard): When an accused is arrested in another State, production before the nearest Magistrate and the issuance of transit remand are mandatory.
- Transporting the accused without such judicial approval is illegal.
- Article 246: Article 246 of the Indian Constitution divides powers between the Union and the States through the Seventh Schedule.
- The Three Lists: The Seventh Schedule includes the Union List (97 subjects), the State List (66 subjects), and the Concurrent List (47 subjects)
- State List (Entry 2): Policing is a State subject.
- This means the responsibility for maintaining law and order lies with the state government.
Current Challenges that need to be tackled
- Political Misuse: Political parties (at both the central and state levels) frequently use police forces to silence or intimidate political rivals.
- Example: 15 police officers were sent across state lines to arrest student protesters, while major crimes and corruption often go unaddressed.
- Bypassing Protocols: In high-profile cases involving clashes between states, police have ignored constitutional limits and failed to inform local authorities, leading to confrontations between different police forces.
- Erosion of Police Professionalism: There is an increasing tendency of senior police officers to bypass established legal procedures to please political executives, showing a decline in professionalism and neutrality.
- Colonial Control Structure: The Police Act of 1861 still gives the political executive strong control over the police.
- As noted by David Bayley, Indian policing often works more under political pressure than strictly under the rule of law.
Way Forward- Implementing SC-Mandated Police Reforms (2006)
- State Security Commission: Operationalise independent commissions to set performance standards and prevent political interference in policing, as mandated in Prakash Singh v. Union of India.
- Fixed Tenure for Leadership: Ensure a minimum two-year tenure for the Director General of Police (DGP) and other key officers to promote stability and autonomy.
- Separation of Investigation & Law and Order: Establish distinct wings for criminal investigation and law and order duties to enhance professionalism and conviction rates.
- Police Complaints Authority: Create functional state and district-level oversight bodies to address public grievances and police misconduct.
- Legislative Reforms: Replace the Police Act of 1861 with modern, accountability-driven legislation and strengthen interstate coordination mechanisms.
Conclusion
Balancing federalism and policing requires strict respect for constitutional boundaries, insulation from political interference, and implementation of police reforms to uphold the rule of law.
3 Mar 2026
.png)
Current Affairs
GS Foundation
Optional Course
Combo Courses
Degree Program
