REPORTS

Figures of crime

R.K. RAGHAVAN

CRIME against property in the country came down by two per cent in 1997; violent crime remained steady at 2.49 lakh offences. Although these statistics may appear incredible, this is a claim made by Crime in India 1997, the official annual publication (price Rs.667 or $38) of the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) of the Ministry of Home Affairs, released recently. In the absence of material that challenges these figures, any analysis of the crime scene will have to make do with the NCRB statistics. The Bureau has grown in stature over the years mainly owing to the accent it has placed on a continual refining of the process of reporting of crime by State police forces. It cannot take the blame for any possible under-reporting or misreporting. Against this backdrop, a study of crime based mostly on Crime in India seems unexceptionable. In any case, we are concerned here with the rise or fall of crime each year, rather than with crime in absolute terms.

Crime is invariably reckoned the world over in terms of its rate, that is, offences per 100,000 of the population. In India, the rate of Indian Penal Code (IPC) offences (most pertinent to our study) has hovered around 170-190, except for an occasional crest (200 in 1981) or a trough (142 in 1961). Interestingly, there was a marginal drop during 1997. Too much cannot be read into this. It must, however, be remembered that crime figures tend to go up with population and any demand that these should necessarily come down is preposterous, to say the least. We are now a nation of more than 960 million as against 360 in 1951. Also, police strength in the States has doubled during the past three decades (0.7 million in 1971 against 1.3 million in 1997) accounting for a higher level of registration of crime. There is consensus here over a balanced approach that, as far as possible, avoids a wholly statistical approach. An observer who plays up the numbers, and a misguided policeman who suppresses crime to hoodwink the public, both distort the perspective of a dispassionate analyst.

Crime in the urban areas is qualitatively different from that in semi-urban and rural areas. Crime in India identifies 23 mega-cities. A 7 per cent rise in incidents of homicide and a 16 per cent spurt in incidents of kidnapping are indicative of the disturbing situation. Delhi had the highest share of urban crime in 1997, followed by Mumbai and Bangalore. Interestingly, in Tamil Nadu, Coimbatore outstripped Chennai.

It is widely known that a practical policeman is one who pays equal attention to solving crime as well as tackling fear of crime in the community. Normally it is the latter that is more difficult to handle. Such fear is often induced by a rash of violent offences. The NCRB's decision to devote a chapter exclusively to this is appropriate, especially when such crime accounts for about 15 per cent of all cognizable cases under the IPC.

Homicide cases dropped by less than one per cent during 1997. This is too insignificant a change to draw any comment. What should, however, cause concern is the fact that they have gone up by more than 30 per cent during the past decade. Property disputes account for 10 per cent of homicide cases. There is some food for thought here for the district administration, especially the executive magistracy, who have powers under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to nip such disputes in the bud.

Incidents of rape are a blot on civilised society. But they occur frequently even in the advanced West. We do have this problem in abundant measure. Whenever there is a spurt, public opinion is enraged leading to a public debate on the need to step up the penalty prescribed by law. Capital punishment is also often mentioned in this context. Although there was just a three per cent rise during 1997, the nearly 80 per cent increase during the decade cannot be brushed aside. Although a majority of the victims are usually in the age group of 16-30, nearly one in three subjected to this crime in 1997 was even younger.

We need to sit up and ask several questions. Apart from social control, are there enough physical safeguards at home and in the work environment to frustrate depredators? This is especially because the rape victim is often violated by a person known to her, either a friend or a close relative. There is a case here for a practical approach by parents and employers that will reduce the opportunity for the commission of crime. This is usually referred to by criminologists as target hardening, although such a term is more often used in association with property crime.

Crime in India has a comprehensive chapter on offences against women. Seven such crimes are identified by the IPC. It should be a revelation to many that there are 17 special enactments relevant to the subject. These include the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and the Dowry Prohibition and Commission of Sati (Prevention) Acts. A five per cent rise in the total number of offences against women does not seem alarming. But the popular perception, especially that of women's organisations, is at variance with the conclusion that could be drawn from actual crime figures. This is why the earlier reference to the fear of crime phenomenon that the police willy-nilly have to contend with. Also for consideration before the police is the question of how to break the impediments in the way of freer reporting of crimes by female victims. Has the institution of women police helped promote this? My own feeling is that this has not helped greatly and there is scope for research.

Instances of property crime (such as robbery, burglary and theft) dropped by about two per cent during 1997. This again is likely to be unacceptable to the average citizen, especially in the metropolitan cities, who perceives crime at his doorstep each living day. The nearly 11 per cent fall in cases of theft is possibly explained by a growing lack of faith in the investigation mechanism. The tendency is to do a cost-benefit analysis of the time spent in seeking police help. On the positive side, community policing projects launched by a few enterprising police officers, which seek to educate the community on how to secure their property, have sent around the message that crime prevention measures do help. There is a case for more serious interest in such projects by supervisory ranks so that crime prevention becomes a matter of habit and a cooperative endeavour.

THE police complain eternally of shrinking resources to combat crime. The complaint is credible in the context of the enormous attention that law and order matters need from law enforcement agencies. There is no gainsaying the fact that the executive has greater stakes in maintaining public peace than in solving individual instances of crime, unless such crime is grave and involves large numbers of the citizenry. The situation is not easily solved and can be tackled only by bringing to bear a certain balance between competing priorities. There is no scientific formula which can guide the policemen in the field.

Crime in India is a very useful compendium of information on the police. From a mere 27.3 policemen per 100 square kilometre. in 1981, there are now 40.4. But in terms of strength per 100,000 of the population, the rise has been from 131 merely to 134. This is a modest ratio that needs a close look. The point, however, is how much governments can do to expand police manpower. Discerning policemen, past and present, will set much score by a more judicious use of existing manpower. They will opt for making the police more equipment-oriented. This needs constant attention from the top leadership of the police.

The NCRB, under the dynamic leadership of Director Sharda Prasad, has many ambitious projects on hand. One such is the proposal to bring out a publication on prison statistics. This will be eagerly awaited as the absence of reliable statistics is a handicap for serious researchers.

Dr. R.K. Raghavan is currently Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi. The views expressed in the article are his own.