Editorial Board Contents - Bureau of Police Research and ...

a bee in his bonnet” 17 , and about the Congress,that it represented no more than a “macroscopicminority”, do not suggest that the Congress wasenjoying official patronage. On the contrary, thedespatch dated 25th March, 1887 of Lord Cross,Secretary of State, on “the collection of secretand political intelligence in India”, suggests thatthe birth of the Congress, specially its secondwell-attended session in Calcutta, in 1886, didnot go unnoticed in London. Thereafter, LordCross suggested the creation of an institution forcollection of “secret political intelligence”, andapproved the proposal for the Central SpecialBranch and the Provincial Special Branches, assoon as it reached him. The birth and growth ofthe Congress, being the only political event ofsignificance during 1885-1887, the intelligenceorganisation that came into existence in 1887,was evidently in response to the new politicaldevelopment. In this context, it is not rationalto think that the British created the Congress asa ‘safety valve’ for the Empire; on the contrary,the Government having foreseen the threat fromthe Congress, set up the institution for politicalintelligence, as a protective measure.3. FROM CENTRAL SPECIAL BRANCHTO INTELLIGENCE BUREAUMcCracken, ensconced at Simla and aided bythe old staff of the Thugee Department, failedto produce much intelligence; though the fewreports he produced, did carry more weight,because of the very nature of informationcollection. The Provincial Special Branches (SB)were attached to the offices of either InspectorGeneral of Police or of Chief Secretary of theprovince. The staff was so meagre and so inept inintelligence collection, that the Government ofBengal described its Special Branch as ‘a farce’.In Bombay Presidency, however, on accountof political murders and Tilak’s prosecution forsedition in 1897-98, the Special Branch becamea little active. At the turn of the century, whensecret societies started proliferating in WesternIndia and Bengal, the Special Branches increasedthe staff strength and improved the techniques ofintelligence collection.The Police Commission (1901-1902) underAndrew Fraser recommended, inter alia, the setting17 Sumit Sarkar” Modern India, P.2up of Criminal Investigation Department(CID)in each province, under a Deputy Inspector,General of Police, for “collating and distributinginformation regarding organized crime and toassist in investigation of crimes when they are ofspecial character.” 18The Commission further recommended:(i)“There should be a similar Department forthe whole of India, presided over by anofficer of the standing and experience ofInspector General.”(ii) “That the functions of the CentralDepartment should be to collect, collateand communicate information, obtainedfrom the Provincial CID or otherwise.”(iii) “That its intervention in the investigationof offences should be confined to suchtechnical crimes as note forgery, etc.” 19The Commission’s recommendation for a separateCriminal Investigation Department (CID) in eachProvince was, in fact, a long-felt need; but therecommendation to set up a Central CID, withthe powers of investigation and supervisionover the Provincial CIDs, was resented asinfringement on Provincial autonomy. Neither inthe terms of reference, nor in the Report of theCommission, mention was made of the Centralor Provincial Special Branches, or anythingrelating to collection of political intelligence.The Commission also appropriately made nocomments on them. It was also silent on the fateof the Thugee Department.The Government of India intervened to rectifythe lacunae and anomalies in the Commission’srecommendations. It abolished the ThugeeDepartment and merged the Central SpecialBranch with the proposed Central CID, renamingit as Central Criminal Intelligence Department(DCI). The power of supervision over theProvincial CIDs was scrapped on the ground ofProvincial autonomy. Its power of investigationof cases was greatly circumscribed, and it wastasked, “to collect and communicate informationwith regard to special forms of crime, some18 Report of the of the First Police Commission, 1901-1903,P4919 Recommendations of the First Police Commission, P 52-53The Indian Police Journal, October - December, 2012, Special Issue 13