EDITORIAL
Public trust will depend on whether police firmly address misconduct within their rank
Six days after the FIR was registered in the alleged sexual assault of a minor girl, the Old Goa police arrested the accused, suspended police inspector Vikas Deykar, and his accomplice, a woman who, according to the police, facilitated the alleged crime. The alleged offences took place in Deykar’s cabin at the Crime Branch police station in Ribandar on two occasions – July 25 and October 27. The FIR was registered on October 30 and, according to the police, Deykar and the woman were questioned separately.
From day one, NGOs, politicians and social workers had been demanding Deykar’s arrest. Their contention was that in such cases a civilian would have been arrested immediately and that the same yardstick should have been applied in this case too. The arrest is apparently linked to mounting public pressure; however, the police cited a different reason. “During further interrogation, material inconsistencies were noticed in their statements, and both accused failed to provide satisfactory explanations regarding crucial aspects of the case. Considering the material collected during investigation, their alleged involvement in the offence, lack of cooperation, necessity of custodial interrogation and apprehensions regarding possible influencing of witnesses and tampering with evidence, both accused were placed under arrest,” the police said on Wednesday following the arrests. According to police officials, arrest is an exception in offences punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years.
Now it remains to be seen whether the case stands in a court of law. There is no doubt that the quality of the investigation and the role of the prosecution will play an important part in the matter. The victim’s cooperation is also very important to take the case to a logical conclusion.
Moreover, it needs to be seen what departmental action the Goa Police Department takes against the accused police officer. A day after the FIR, Director General of Police (DGP) Alok Kumar, responding to media queries on the matter, had said, “We have a zero tolerance policy against misconduct. Immediate action is taken. In this case already legal action and departmental action has been initiated.”
People would want stringent action against such erring personnel, which could include dismissal from service. This can happen only if the departmental inquiry is proved. But even if it is proved, the officer might get away with a reduced punishment, as was seen some years ago. In October 2018, police sub-inspector (PSI) Rahul Dhamshekar was dismissed from service by Deputy Inspector General of Police (disciplinary authority), Goa Police Department, after the departmental inquiry against him in connection with a 2013 bribery case was proved. The PSI appealed against the order before the Inspector General of Police (appellate authority), and the penalty of dismissal from service was quashed and set aside in June 2019. He was reinstated in service and awarded a penalty of reduction of pay to a lower stage. However, the corruption case is pending trial before the District and Sessions Court, North Goa. Dhamshekar is currently holding the post of police inspector (PI).
The Goa Police Citizen Charter states, “Goa Police resolves to give people efficient, law-abiding and responsive law enforcement machinery.”
People in general would never want tainted policemen in the force. However, the final decision rests with those in authority. In the past, assurances or statements have been made by those in power or authority regarding ‘zero tolerance’, ‘stringent action’ and so on against erring personnel. But in reality, the situation has always turned out to be different. People will start believing only when those in power or authority ‘walk the talk’ and hold erring officials accountable.
