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

of which have been rendered more difficultfor suppression, by the recent expansion ofrailways and the increased use of Post Officesand the Telegraph by the natives”. Under thishead, the Department could “organize andsupervise operations directed against criminaltribes, organized dacoits working over largeareas, wandering gangs of criminals, noteforgers,coiners, and professional poisoners etc.Besides, “collecting and testing intelligence uponmatters, including social, religious and politicalmovements, not necessarily of criminal nature,should also be the duty of the Central CriminalIntelligence Department.”But the proposal of the Government of India wasconsiderably modified by the Home Government,as they could view situations in India in muchclearer political and administrative perspectivethan the local administrators, who were tooinvolved in personal and inter-departmentalrivalries, to take an objective view of the situation.While the Government of India sought to makeit a department for criminal intelligence andmarginally, for political intelligence, the HomeGovernment made political intelligence its primaryresponsibility. The Secretary of State scrappedthe power of investigation of certain criminalcases bestowed on the Central Intelligence, onthe ground of provincial autonomy. Further, inthe context of the political unrest then brewingin several provinces, the Central Intelligencewas to collect political intelligence alone. In hisDespatch No.70, dated 22nd April, 1904, theSecretary of State asserted that the provincialautonomy had been working satisfactorily, andtherefore, nothing should be done to disturb it. Hewarned that he “would not regard with approvalany attempt to share for the Supreme Governmentby means of an establishment, working undertheir direct order, the duty of investigatingcrime”. Thus, shorn off the investigation duties,the Central Criminal Intelligence Departmentwas left with the responsibility of “collectingand testing intelligence upon matters includingsocial, religious and political movements, notnecessarily of criminal nature.” 20 The Secretary ofState, through his judicious intervention, made itessentially an agency for collection of politicalintelligence, while Curzon’s administration20 Amiya K.Samanta: op.cit, Pp 49-54wanted to make it a central authority, forcoordinating the activities of the Provincial policeforces. The name suggested by the Government ofIndia, however, remained unchanged, though theterm ‘criminal’ 21 in the nomenclature, evidentlybecame anomalous.The Police Commission proposed theappointment of “an officer of standing andexperience of the Inspector General”, andaccordingly the appointment of Harold A.Stuart, ICS, Inspector General of Police, MadrasPresidency, as Director of the Central CriminalIntelligence, was approved. Stuart joined asDirector on 19th April, 1904, and McCrackenjoined as Deputy Director. The Secretary of Statedeclined to communalize the Department byappointing one Hindu and one Muslim AssistantDirector, on the ground that the Head of theDepartment “ought himself to be qualified ingauging native feeling and opinion.” The existingstaff of the Thugee Department was absorbed inthe DCI. Though, Home Secretary Risley statedthat the DCI “would be located at the headquartersof the Government of India,” 22 Stuart, however,continued the practice of going to Calcutta incold weather, while the headquarters of theDepartment remained at Simla.In the initial years of the DCI, the total expenditurefor the DCI was only Rs 25,000 more than theexpenditure for the Central SB, but gradually itsexpenditure went on increasing. The DCI, likethe Central SB, used to get a paltry amount assecret service fund till 1907, when it was raisedto rupees fifty thousand, and after the bomb attackon Hardinge, in 1912, it was raised to one lakhrupees annually.Some apologists for the Empire, like RichardPopplewell have claimed that there was ageneral aversion in the British administration forspy system and “The reform of police intelligenceunder Curzon, was in no way stimulated by theexistence of Indian nationalism, either of themoderate variety, represented by the majority ofCongress politicians, or of the more extreme type,21 The telegraphic address of the Department as “criminaire”is derived from “Criminal Intelligence” and the addressstill continues although the name has been changed toIntelligence Bureau in 1920.22 Home Department No. 594/603 dated Simla,the 30th June,1904. Also see Amiya K.Samanta:op.cit, Appendix-B14The Indian Police Journal, October - December, 2012, Special Issue