Analysing crime

Astonishing figures presented in statistics for 1996 relating to India, released by the National Crime Records Bureau, provoke questions.

R. K. RAGHAVAN

The FBI statistics are virtually worthless. They fail to tell us even the most rudimentary things we need to know about the relationship between police resources and crime. To explain why more police will not reduce the crime rate, we need to delve into issues of police management, which the FBI data blithely ignore.
- Samuel Walker in Sense and Nonsense About Crime.

POLICE forces the world over are pathologically uncomfortable with a rising crime graph. Systematic efforts are therefore made by some of them to dress up figures so as to circulate an erroneous impression that crime is on the wane. There are, however, a few enlightened police chiefs who would like to impress on the community that population growth and a spurt in crime are directly proportional to each other and that any claim of a dip in crime, from whatever quarters it comes, is dubious. Fewer still are those who encourage the lower police formations to bring on record all offences coming to their notice ("free registration") without doctoring statistics. Unfortunately, such officers have very often come to grief because no one in authority would like to take the flak for a rise in crime and an apparent loss of control over the situation.

What induces a distinct lack of faith in crime statistics is also the widespread fear of crime that haunts the average citizen, especially in high-crime countries such as the United States and India. Any attempt to prove that certain categories of crime are under control or are actually declining is of no avail since the fear psychosis reigns supreme over realities. Even those who have not been victims of crime themselves tend to be swayed by emotions rather than by actual experiences. It is against this backdrop that crime statistics have lost credibility in many countries.

Crime in India is the annual publication of the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), the nodal agency under the Union Home Ministry that collects and disseminates crime statistics for the country. Priced at Rs.400, it is a researcher's delight - a goldmine of information, with tables and graphs. The 1996 issue, which was released recently, shows that during the year, when the estimated population increase by the middle of the year was about 2 per cent, cognisable offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) rose only by about 1 per cent and violent crime actually dropped by a similar margin.

These astonishing figures provoke several questions. This is not in the least meant to discredit an organisation that has been built over more than a decade by police leaders of eminence and has achieved an international stature which is hard to ignore. The NCRB has so effectively computerised the collection and analysis of crime figures that there is little margin for error in arriving at conclusions. If one is sceptical of its analysis for 1996, the fault does not lie with the NCRB. The NCRB merely adds figures received from the States and presents the whole picture. The expression "garbage in, garbage out" is appropriate here.

There are two plausible explanations for the amazingly stable 1996 crime scene. It is likely that State police forces were extremely "selective" in registering crime. Also, many victims possibly do not any longer consider it worth their while reporting crime. These are complementary factors, which together point to an extremely distressing situation. While suppression of crime ("burking" as the slang goes) is prevalent in India and several police reform commissions have come down heavily on it, the feeling that it is futile to approach the police is possibly gaining ground simultaneously.

Within these limitations, it may still be possible to make sense out of what Crime in India 1996 says on various aspects of the scene. Offences attended with violence cause the utmost fear in law-abiding citizens. In 1996, these dropped by 0.7 per cent, a statistic that hardly squares with the widespread belief, despite India's biannual (January 30 and October 2) protestations of ahimsa, that India is becoming a frightfully violent nation.

Homicides constitute a class of offence that is difficult to suppress, even by the most ingenious of police forces. They showed a marginal increase in 1996, as against the nearly 40 per cent increase during the decade.

It is unlikely that the rising curve could be reversed in the near future, especially in the metropolises where a variety of factors, including the birth of criminal gangs and a steady influx of migrants from rural areas, have lent a new dimension to economic and social interactions. What should be more worrying is the poor quality of police investigation, set against exacting standards of proof demanded by the judiciary.

Apart from rigorous training of investigators and greater use of scientific methods, including DNA technology, homicide investigation can benefit from closer supervision by the higher echelons of the police force, whose priorities are sometimes regrettably warped. A higher success rate in courts will considerably enhance the image of the police and the community's sense of security. It could also lead to a marginal decline in the rate of homicides, although it is known that most murders are crimes of passion and therefore not exactly preventable.

Property-related crime, especially burglary and robbery, can also be traumatic to the victim. Many persons are known to have turned mental wrecks after losing their life-time possessions to a depredator. The nearly 3 per cent drop in property-related offences reported by Crime in India is difficult to swallow.

In the case of property -related crime, more than in the case of physical crime the average citizen is extremely sceptical of the police response. Complaints of refusal to register cases, tardiness in investigation and dishonest practices in bringing to record recovered stolen property are common nationwide. This negative image unfortunately sticks in spite of the many resounding successes of the police in restoring property to its lawful owners. For instance, nearly 40 per cent of about 15,000 motor vehicles (excluding motorcycles and scooters) stolen all over the country were recovered in 1996. This performance is somewhat heartening in the context of the staggering growth of vehicles on the road.

Greater prudence on the part of the citizens in protecting their belongings at home or while travelling and meaningful education in crime prevention by the police could also make the job of the criminal more difficult. 'Target hardening', as this strategy is often referred to by criminologists, is not the responsibility solely of the police. Community policing, as it has evolved in the U.S. and the United Kingdom, is one sure way to impart knowledge to the public in this area.

No discussion of crime is complete without a reference to crimes against women. There are allegations of growing atrocities against women and of police apathy to the issue and connivance with the offenders. Emotions, rather than an endeavour to formulate concrete crime prevention measures, have characterised the debate on the subject. The problem is, however, real and demands focussed action.

Crime in India has a separate chapter on the subject. Spread over 11 categories of offences, including rape, dowry death and sexual harassment, which are dealt with by the IPC and 17 special enactments, the study reveals a nearly 6 per cent rise in such crimes during 1996. This increase is substantial if one considers the fact that social stigma and the complexities of social legislation often impede free reporting of such crimes.

Rape is perhaps the most dastardly and reprehensible of all crimes. Its perpetrator comes from the most unsuspecting of backgrounds, and often a close relative has the easiest access to the victim. Reporting is therefore greatly inhibited and investigation equally problem-ridden. An 8 per cent rise in such an under-reported offence is ground enough for alarm.

That nearly one-third of rape victims were under 16 years of age gives an idea of the task on hand. Even after the offender is hauled up before court, tortuous judicial processes militate against speedy justice. Only 16 per cent of the cases that either came on file during 1996 or were already pending were heard and the conviction rate was a dismal 4.5 per cent. Women's organisations are justifiably incensed at the criminal justice system.

Gender sensitivity is no doubt an area that concerns all the three wings of the system, namely the police, the judiciary and the corrective apparatus. But, as the first point of contact for the victim, the police cannot look the other way when an atrocity is committed. Actually, the weakest link is the police station where violations against women are not uncommon, despite the strongest kinds of disciplinary measures against delinquent policemen. Focussed training of the constabulary, both at the entry level and in-service, seems to provide the only hope of reducing the frequency of such shocking incidents.

There were 5,513 dowry deaths during 1996. This again represented an 8 per cent rise over the previous year. A majority of the cases were in Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.

HOW does India compare with the rest of the world here? In the absence of any other source, official statistics have to be relied upon. India emerges somewhat favourably mainly because of an overwhelming population: population universally forms the basis for arriving at the crime rate, namely, offence per 100,000 of the population. A comparison with another high-crime country, the U.S., seems appropriate. Notwithstanding a general level of affluence, that country's galling economic disparities and diverse population make the comparison fairly acceptable. While the overall crime rate of the U.S. (5,278) is very much higher than in India (185.1), the galloping incidence of homicides in India cannot go unnoticed. By contrast, the U.S. reported a 9 per cent drop in homicides during 1996.

Finally, an analysis of crime and its control can be meaningful only in the context of the resources available to the police in the States. At the end of 1996, the strength of the civil police in the States was a little less than a million. Crime work is handled essentially by unarmed officers in the rank of Sub-Inspectors and Inspectors. Taking these two ranks alone into account, and assuming that all of them were put on investigation work - an assumption that is erroneous on its face because of the frequent and notorious diversion of valuable manpower to law and order and VIP security responsibilities - their workload in 1996 was nearly 20 cases per officer. This is too heavy a burden if one takes into account the effort, both field visits and scriptory work, involved in the process. The poor quality of crime investigation, except by specialist agencies such as the Criminal Investigation Departments (CID), is therefore not surprising.

Samuel Walker's jibe at the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) statistics is not irrelevant to India. Crime figures should neither be deified nor abused. They do not measure crime in absolute terms. They do not also permit generalisations for the purpose of either extolling or denouncing a police force.

So long as the mechanics used by a country for registering crime and collecting statistics do not undergo fundamental changes, such figures could at best be used to pinpoint any abnormal rise or drop in specific types of offences during a particular year. This facilitates appropriate administrative action, such as adding manpower and equipment to police resources and adopting intensified crime control measures by the police. Such a perspective of balance and moderation, which spurns politicisation of crime statistics, is, however, the researcher's dream.

Dr. R.K. Raghavan is a Director-General of the Tamil Nadu Police. A forthcoming book by him attempts a comparative study of policing in India and the U.S.

Table of Contents

Home | The Hindu | Business Line | Sportstar