The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed contempt pleas filed against the Jharkhand government over the appointment of Anurag Gupta (IPS:1990:JH) as the state’s Director General of Police (DGP).
The case also brought into focus the continuing debate over police reforms and the process of appointing state police chiefs. Prakash Singh, the former DGP of Uttar Pradesh and Assam, on whose petition the apex court had, 19 years ago, framed landmark guidelines mandating UPSC involvement and a fixed two-year tenure for DGPs, has suggested major changes to the existing mechanism, citing poor compliance by states.
Amicus curiae and senior advocate Raju Ramachandran informed a bench led by CJI Bhushan R Gavai, along with Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria, that several states have devised rules for DGP selection that are markedly different from the procedure laid down in the 2006 judgment delivered by then CJI Y K Sabharwal.
According to the suggestions attributed to Singh, states should constitute a panel comprising the chief minister, leader of opposition, and chief justice of the high court to select the DGP from among eligible senior IPS officers.
However, CJI Gavai questioned the constitutional viability of such an arrangement, remarking: “To what extent does the Supreme Court have the competence to go beyond legislation enacted by states for selection of DGPs? If the High Court Chief Justice is made part of the selection process, which is an executive function, would it not breach the constitutionally mandated separation of powers between legislature, executive, and judiciary?”
While the apex court refused to entertain the contempt petitions, the discussion has reignited a crucial debate over DGP appointments and long-pending police reforms across states.
Also Read: SC declines contempt plea against Jharkhand DGP Anurag Gupta’s appointment
Join Us on WhatsApp