In modern India, the police department is one of the most important institutions responsible for maintaining law and order, protecting the rights of citizens and maintaining peace in the society. In principle, the Indian Police Service was established with the noble objective of protecting the people, preventing crime and ensuring justice. But, in practice, the current situation of the police force has deteriorated so much that corruption has become part of its foundation. Today ordinary citizens, social workers, retired officers and media analysts often see and say that about 98% of police personnel, from lower ranks to higher positions, are involved in some form of corruption. This shocking truth raises serious concerns about the existence of governance, morality and democracy in India.
This number of 98% may seem exaggerated to some, but in the daily lives of Indian citizens, their experience with the police department shows a consistent picture of exploitation, bribery, extortion, manipulation and abuse of power. The police, which is supposed to be the body that guards justice, has in many cases become an exploitative body. Be it traffic police demanding bribes on the streets, police station officials making false cases, or high-ranking officials colluding with political leaders and criminals, corruption has spread to almost every corner of the police system.
This essay attempts to critically analyze the depth of corruption in the Indian Police Department at present. It will discuss the historical roots of corruption, its symptoms in the present times, its connection with politics and bureaucracy, the reasons for such widespread unethical behavior and the consequences to common citizens. Furthermore, this discussion will also explain how such corruption harms the moral foundation of the country and what reforms can make a difference.
The roots of corruption, dominance and public distrust in the Indian police can be seen in the colonial period. When the British introduced formal policing in India, their aim was not to serve or protect the local people. The police were made a means of control – an organization that protected the interests of colonial rulers, suppressed nationalist movements, collected revenue, and maintained law and order in the interests of the British Empire. The basic objective of the police has never been service, justice or accountability to the citizens. Rather, it was based on post-sopan, coercion, surveillance and punishment.
A turning point in institutionalizing this model was the Indian Police Act of 1861. Soon after the Revolution of 1857, the British feared further uprisings and decided that a uniform, centralized and loyal police force was needed to control the masses. The Act emphasized obedience to power rather than the public good and gave too much power to officials, while there was no provision for accountability to the public. Local people were not considered citizens with rights, but people who have to be disciplined and controlled. This arrangement ensured that the police remained accountable, not to society, but to government officials and colonial administrators.
When India became independent in 1947, it was expected in the country that the country would create institutions based on democracy, respect and service to the people. Many believed that colonial-era laws would be changed and policing would be rebuilt in accordance with the aspirations of an independent nation. But, this hope was not fulfilled. Instead of making changes to the existing policing system, the new Indian government maintained most of the laws, command structure and mentality inherited from the British. Even today the Police Act of 1861 is the mainstay of the police in India, with minor changes made in some states.
Rulers changed, but police thinking did not change. The idea that the police should serve the ruling power rather than the common people continued in the new democratic government. Governments found the old system convenient because it provided a ready machinery of control and enforcement. Now politicians could use the same colonial methods to defend their interests, suppress opposition and control society without creating new frameworks based on accountability or reform. This led to a dangerous continuum: the colonial mentality remained behind a new nationalist face.
In the decades after independence, the police were rarely remodeled to serve the general public as equal partners. Training, leadership and legal provisions further strengthened the culture of fear rather than trust. Common practices such as custodial violence, arbitrary detention, bribery and bullying were justified, not because democracy demanded them, but because the colonial system had created policing based on these methods. That system persisted and gradually became a part of Indian administrative thinking. Corruption also increased in this inherited system. In British-era policing, high officials were encouraged to obey without question and rely on non-formal networks of power and patronage.
After independence, these habits did not end; they changed. Authorities quickly learned that by building relationships with politicians, local influencers, or criminal networks, they could secure their positions, make financial gains, and make career advances. Rather than eliminate the culture of extortion or favoritism, the atmosphere made these practices look like normal procedure. Such common practices for decades ensured that corruption was not considered a mistake, but rather part of everyday functioning.
Even honest officers, who wanted to act responsibly, found themselves trapped. They often had to compromise because of internal systems and political dependencies. For refusing to engage in corruption, they would be harassed, transferred, promotion stopped or isolated. Due to this pressure, many officials concluded that it was necessary to keep up with the system, if not to move forward, then at least to live. Due to this, corruption became a system problem rather than a matter of personal morality.
People’s thinking towards the police is also made up of this colonial heritage. People do not consider the police to be the guardians of justice, but to be afraid or to meet them only when necessary. For many people, especially the poor and marginalized, meeting the police is an experience to be feared, not helped. This mistrust is associated with the old dictatorial model, in which the police were not accountable to the public and understood no responsibility to treat people with respect or equality.
It is sad that India missed many opportunities to change policing. At independence the country had a chance to dismantle the colonial system of fear and control. But he adopted and maintained them. Over time, democratic governments began using this force to dominate rather than serve. The idea of protecting those in power, instead of protecting the citizens, remained the same. As a result, the legacy of British rule became the basis of modern Indian policing.
Today’s problems – corruption, vandalism, political abuse, lack of trust – are not new shortcomings, but old ones that were allowed to flourish and grow. The improvement was discussed several times, but the system’s aupnivesic DNA remains the same. Not accepting this historical truth makes it difficult to understand why attempts at change fail time and time again. It’s not just about personal wrongdoing; It’s about a system that was created for repression and keeps working without any changes.
The British left India in 1947, but the policing thinking they created never changed. She just turned into hands. Therefore, the system is still under the shadow of colonial rule and corruption has not only become possible but has also become necessary in many places.
Today the image of the police in India is linked to corruption, a problem so widespread that it affects almost every level of law enforcement. From the lowest level constables in remote districts to high-ranking officials in big metros, bribery, favoritism and abuse of power have become commonplace. Corruption is no longer just a minor omission from duty; it has become an integral part of the policing system. Citizens face corruption at almost every stage of their interaction with the police, regardless of social status. Money is often demanded secretly or openly even in simple acts such as filing First Information Reports (FIRs). Bribes or favors are often demanded from citizens seeking clearance certificates for jobs, passports or other government work, turning normal administrative procedures into exploitation. Even the most basic expectation of security, which is the main job of the police, is often dependent on giving money or building good relations.
This widespread corruption is not limited to minor incidents only. It spans complex, interconnected networks involving politicians, business interests and organised crime. In many cases, law officers protect or promote powerful people involved in illegal activities. Politicians, real estate developers, industrialists and influencers enlist the help of police officers to circumvent legal procedures, hide evidence or intimidate rivals. In return, policemen often receive career benefits such as gifts, cash payments or promotions and good postings. This means that crimes ranging from land grabbing and illegal possession to major financial fraud and corporate wrongdoing often go on without restraint. The common citizen who depends on the police for justice remains completely unsafe. The result is a dual system of law enforcement: one that serves the rich, influential, or related, and another that ignores or exploits the socially or economically vulnerable.
There are many modern examples of corruption in urban areas. Implementing traffic rules, which is an easy task in principle, has become a profitable business for many executives. Drivers often pay bribes to avoid fines or vehicle impoundments, while wealthy people repeatedly break the rules, with no action against them. This discriminatory use of law undermines the idea of equality before the law and creates the impression that there is no need to follow the rules if someone can pay. In addition to traffic policing, urban police often become involved in organized crime networks, real estate scams, and illegal construction activities. Officials who ignore for money or political gain promote criminal activities, which spoils not only law and order but also the integrity of the local administration.
The situation in rural India is also worrying, but it is a little different. Here, police corruption is often associated with local power structures, especially the influence of landlords, big businessmen and political leaders. Authorities often side with these influential people in land, resources or caste disputes, causing marginalised communities – such as tenants, labourers or lower caste people – to suffer greatly. Complaints from weaker sections of society are often ignored, evaded or used in favor of influential people. This discrimination not only promotes social inequality, but also prevents ordinary people from going to the police, thereby strengthening the culture for influential people to live without any punishment.
This prevalence of corruption has greatly damaged the credibility of the Indian Police. Considered pillars of security and justice, the police are now seen as exploitative, selfish and discriminatory in enforcing the law. The public trust needed for effective policing has been reduced to dangerous levels. Citizens also have recourse to a network of bribes, political connections or recommendation for their basic rights and protection guaranteed by law. This system has become a way of consolidating power, making illegal earnings and maintaining inequality, rather than being a defender of justice.
Another important aspect of modern corruption in the police is its systemic and deep-rooted nature. It is not just a group of a few corrupt officials; it is a structural feature of the institution. The relationship between politicians, bureaucrats, business interests and police officers creates a network in which corruption is encouraged and those who protest are punished. Honest officials trying to enforce the law in an impartial manner often face transfers, harassment, or career interruptions, which does not encourage ethical behavior. Over time, this has led to a cycle that reinforces itself: corruption not only becomes widespread but also institutionalized, deeply ingrained in the functioning and cultural fabric of policing.
Furthermore, this systemic corruption has long-lasting effects on society. This promotes inequality, as rich people can run the system their own way, while poor and marginalized people remain vulnerable. It encourages criminals by giving them security in exchange for financial or political gain. It undermines democratic institutions by allowing discriminatory implementation of the law. And most importantly, it reduces citizens’ trust in governance, which is the foundation of a successful democracy. When people do not trust the police, they are less likely to cooperate with law enforcement, report crimes or engage in civic activities, further undermining social cohesion and public order.
Corruption in India’s police is widespread, multidimensional and deeply institutionalized. It stands out as petty incidents of bribery, complex networks of powerful people, and discriminatory law enforcement, which benefits the influential and suppresses the vulnerable. Both urban and rural policing are affected, though in different ways, and the consequences go far beyond individual transactions. By undermining public trust, promoting criminal activity and perpetuating inequality, corruption has made the police a means of accumulating power and wealth from an institution that maintains justice. The credibility of the police, and consequently the legitimacy of the State, are constantly under threat because of this deep-rooted and systematic corruption.
The basis of law and order in any society is the trust of citizens in law enforcement agencies. The job of the police force is to protect the people, enforce the law impartially, maintain peace and ensure that everyone gets justice. When citizens perceive the police to be impartial, non-discriminatory and honest in their duty, they are more likely to cooperate with the authorities, give important information and voluntarily respect the law. The relationship between the public and the police becomes a partnership, where mutual trust strengthens the stability of society. However, in India, this essential trust has been severely eroded over the decades, creating a major obstacle to effective governance and social harmony.
One of the main reasons for the breakdown of this trust is the general perception of corruption in the police force. Surveys, empirical evidence and general public opinion show that most officials use corrupt methods, whether it is taking bribes, favoring or protecting criminals. The general perception that some 98 per cent of policemen are corrupt is perhaps exaggerated, but it reflects the depth of frustration in the public. Civilians meet the police with suspicion, feeling that any negotiations could lead to exploitation rather than help. This perception is not wrong, because many incidents in India have shown misuse of power, bribery and arbitrary enforcement of laws, creating an environment where common people feel helpless in front of power.
The practical consequences of this mistrust are serious. Many people choose to remain silent when they have a crime, rather than go to the police. This silence is not indifference, but an escape strategy in a system they consider hostile. Ordinary citizens fear that reporting the incident will not lead to justice, but to harassment, extortion or threats from law enforcement officials. For example, a small bribe may be demanded to file a complaint, or officials may deliberately delay the processing of cases to provide an opportunity to exert more pressure. In many cases, the fear of revenge is so great that victims consider it safe to remain silent, rather than fight the system that is in place to protect them.
The collapse of trust is particularly severe in sensitive and socially complex cases. Crimes such as sexual harassment, domestic violence, dowry-related atrocities or caste-based atrocities often involve vulnerable victims, mainly women and marginalized communities. In such cases, reluctance to approach the police is compounded by the belief that law enforcement officials will dismiss the complaint or abuse it in favour of the accused. For example, women reporting sexual assault may face a victim blaming attitude, process delays, or flagrant bullying, thereby avoiding further reporting. Similarly, victims of dowry violence or caste-related crimes often meet with officials who are biased against the accused because of social or political connections or are influenced by bribes. The result is a systemic rejection of justice, completely endangering those most in need of protection.
This widespread distrust affects everywhere in society. When citizens feel that the police are not impartial or trustworthy, they are less interested in civic responsibilities such as reporting crime, participating in community policing, or cooperating with investigations. The lack of public cooperation makes crime very difficult to detect and prevent, creating a vicious cycle, in which law enforcement becomes even less effective. At the same time, this lack of trust gives criminals more courage. Criminals are more likely to commit crimes without fear if they think the police can be bribed, threatened or abused, further undermining the rule of law.
Moreover, the collapse of trust in the police has a cascading effect on social stability. In communities where people cannot rely on law enforcement, non-formal methods of justice often emerge. Vigilanceists, self-proclaimed community promoters or local rulers may come forward to resolve disputes or punish criminals. These methods may seem effective in the short term, but they are inherently illegal and often arbitrary. They can lead to abuse of power, false accusations, mob violence and the breakdown of social cohesion. In fact, the failure of official policing promotes alternative “justice” systems that are without rules, unpredictable and often unjust. The psychological impact of this distrust is also significant. Citizens experience constant anxiety, fear and insecurity, knowing that their security depends not on legislation but on dealing with corrupt arrangements or avoiding negotiations with the authorities. Victims of crime may suffer trauma for a longer period of time because the official mechanisms designed to alleviate their misery further exacerbate their misery. Communities, especially those who are economically or socially marginalized, feel helpless thinking that the law works only for the powerful, influential or rich.
This deep decline in trust creates a major deficit in the justice system. When common people consider the police trustworthy or powerful, the basic objective of law and order becomes useless. Justice becomes inaccessible to those who need it most, perpetuating inequality, fear and insecurity. In a successful democracy, citizens’ trust in the police is an important means of defending against lawlessness, exploitation and abuse of power. But in India, this breakdown of trust has caused a major rift in the social compact, where institutions with responsibility for security are considered a threat.
The breakdown of trust between Indian citizens and the police is a serious challenge to governance, social harmony and democratic values. The perception of widespread corruption, exploitation of victims in sensitive cases, fear of victimization and reliance on non-formal justice mechanisms, combine to create an environment in which law enforcement cannot perform its basic duty. Without system reform, accountability, transparency and the establishment of independent monitoring mechanisms, the police will not be seen as protectors of civilians, but as obstacles to justice, unless public confidence returns. Until this trust is rebuilt, peace and order in society will remain weak and the idea of equal protection before the law will also be at risk.
One of the most important and persistent causes of corruption in the Indian police force is political interference. From the smallest municipality to the top of power at the state or central level, politicians often consider the police to be a means of consolidating and wielding their political power rather than an independent institution that enforces the law. This problem has been going on for many decades and it badly affects principles such as professionalism, accountability and impartiality required for effective law and order. Political interference in the police in India takes many forms, such as controlling postings and transfers, influencing investigations, arbitrarily running criminal cases and protecting party people.
The most obvious and damaging form of political interference is the posting and transfer of officials. Ideally, appointments and transfers should be based on qualifications, experience and operational needs of the police. But in many Indian states, these decisions are greatly influenced by the political affiliation of the authorities or their perceived loyalty. Those who are willing to work for the interests of political leaders – whether it’s targeting opponents, ignoring illegal activities of party supporters or promoting protectionism – often get good postings. On the other hand, officials who try to enforce the law impartially, investigate crimes without discrimination, or resist political pressure often face poor postings or career interruptions. This system not only demoralizes honest officials but also promotes corruption, ensuring that political loyalty is more important than honesty or ability.
This culture has far reaching consequences. When officials are prepared to prioritize pleasing political leaders rather than serving the public, professionalism is eroded and moral standards are undermined. The main duty of the police – to enforce the law impartially, protect citizens and maintain law and order – becomes secondary to loyalty to the political system. Officials quickly learn that breaking rules or using corrupt methods is often necessary to stay in the system. This has led to a culture in which bribes, extortion, and favoritism have become commonplace and blurred the line between legal and illegal behavior. Over time, this environment becomes such that corruption becomes common and acceptable not only in the police but also in the thinking of common people.
Political interference directly impacts police behavior in operational matters. In many areas, officials openly support ruling party workers, while harassing members of the opposition or dissenting citizens. During elections, the impact of this abuse increases even more, as the police are deliberately deployed to intimidate voters, suppress opposition activities or change the outcome in favor of the ruling party. There are many cases across the country in which the police have been accused of ignoring the illegal activities of party supporters, such as rallies, processions and even violent activities, while on the other hand, the opponents or common people who exercise their democratic rights. Action is taken against citizens. Such practices lead to fear, injustice and mistrust among the public, and they tend to regard the police as a weapon of political power, not a fair obeyer of the law.
This loyalty-based system of corruption is further strengthened by the bureaucratic structure of the police force. Senior officials often work with political interests in mind rather than professional sense. Junior officers, seeing the benefits they get for political support, behave in the same way to gain career advancement or avoid punishment. The result is that this organization not only tolerates corruption but also promotes it systematically at every level. Political patronage becomes everything, and moral policing is greatly reduced, often punished rather than rewarded. This also means that reform efforts face heavy opposition, as political leaders directly benefit from maintaining their control over the police. Attempts to establish independent monitoring entities or make appointments on the basis of merit are often prevented, undermined or ignored in order to maintain the existing situation.
Another dangerous effect of political interference is loss of public trust. Public trust in law enforcement is sharply eroded when citizens see police side with the strong, ignore the law, and manipulate investigations to protect political interests. Common people, especially those from marginalized communities, feel that the system is against them. If complaints of crime, harassment or corruption relate to politically connected people, they are often ignored or retaliated against. This creates fear among the public: the possibility of reporting civil offences, cooperating in investigations or seeking justice through official channels is reduced. As a result, criminal activities flourish unabated, and law enforcement loses its credibility as a defender of justice.
Political interference also leads to corruption and other forms of exploitation. Officials working for political interests are often involved in large networks of bribery, extortion and favoritism, thereby patronizing illegal activities such as land grabbing, financial fraud or smuggling. Companies and influential people pay bribes or give other benefits to get the police to take whatever action they want, creating a cycle of corruption that undermines governance and the rule of law. This relationship between political power, the police and criminal elements ensures that ordinary citizens are marginalized and that justice is limited to those with money or influence alone. Political interference is perhaps the biggest reason for corruption in the Indian Police. It values loyalty to political leaders more than ability, morality or professionalism to create a system in which corruption becomes commonplace, justice is biased and citizens’ trust continues to wane. From influencing postings and transfers to directing investigations and protecting party people, political interference impacts every aspect of police functioning. This system based on loyalty not only reduces the capacity of law enforcement, but also undermines principles such as democracy, fairness and equality before the law. Unless political control is reduced and recruitment in the police is done on the basis of independence, accountability and merit, corruption will not be rooted out and the police will continue to serve the people it has to protect, not the general public.
The experience of ordinary citizens in India with the police is often very disturbing, with a sense of fear, despair and helplessness. For many people, going to the police is not a matter of getting security or justice, but rather a deliberate decision given the risk of exploitation, harassment and financial burden. From small towns to large metropolises, police systems operate in such a way that access to justice is often dependent on the ability to combat corruption, use influence or pay bribes. The task that should be easy – filing a complaint, reporting a crime or seeking protection – has become a complex and scary experience for ordinary citizens.
The first difficulty citizens face is in filing complaints. The first step in any criminal investigation, filing a First Information Report (FIR), is often accompanied by a secret or explicit demand for money. Many policemen prefer those who give economic benefits, rather than looking at complaints objectively. Citizens are often asked to make the process of filing a complaint “easy” by making cash payments or doing some kind of favor, suggesting that the police will take action only if something is given to them. For those who cannot or do not want to pay, this process becomes difficult and troublesome. Complaints remain pending, documents are lost, or citizens have to make repeated rounds without any expectations. Even in minor incidents such as theft, damage to property or a minor accident, the action is not slow or slow unless economic benefits are paid. This system changes the police from a public service institution to an institution that provides justice to specific people, making security and law and order a thing to be bought with money.
The problem does not end until a complaint is filed. More money is needed at several stages to ensure that the case is properly investigated. Officials may also have to pay bribes to visit the scene, take statements, collect evidence or submit reports immediately. In serious cases like assault, sexual assault or land dispute, the matter becomes even more serious and the demand for money, influence or relationship also increases. Citizens find themselves trapped in a system where justice is not a right, but something that has to be bought. Those who cannot meet these economic demands are faced with a bitter truth: their grievances are ignored, dismissed or deliberately withheld.
For poor and marginalized people, its consequences are very serious. People from low-income, socially backward communities or rural areas often suffer due to lack of financial resources or political influence to combat these corrupt methods. Consequently, they are deliberately deprived of protection and become victims of exploitation. Instead of providing security, the police become an instrument of repression. Complaints lodged by these groups are often ignored, delayed or deliberately mishandled. Investigations are deliberately undermined, evidence may be ignored or misrepresented, and case files may mysteriously disappear. In serious cases, false accusations are made against vulnerable people to intimidate them into remaining silent. Physical and mental torture in custody is a common method of coercion, often used to punish, take bribes, or force work. This environment creates an atmosphere of fear, where ordinary citizens begin to understand that asking or opposing questions to law enforcement leads not to justice but to revenge.
Even normal conversation with the police can make people very weak. Take the example of a road accident: Instead of helping victims, keeping accurate records of the incident and getting proper compensation, officials may delay preparing the report or ask for money to complete the necessary formalities. The same happens with theft, robbery or property disputes. The message given to citizens, especially poor people, is that justice depends on money or relationships, and without them it is almost impossible to get legal help. This system promotes social discrimination, which benefits those with economic strength or political support, while ordinary citizens remain vulnerable, helpless and deprived of rights.
The impact of such systemic corruption is not limited to individual cases, but it also reduces public trust in law enforcement and administration. When citizens are constantly harassed, asked for bribes and obstructed in work, they begin to believe that the main job of the police is to protect the influential and not the general public. This lack of trust makes people hesitant to report crime, cooperate with investigations, or engage in civic participation, creating a dangerous cycle. Crimes are not reported, criminals remain fearless and the police further exploit those trying to deal with the system. In fact, the common citizen is caught between a corrupt system and a dangerous social environment, where he has no hope of security or justice.
Furthermore, this widespread corruption has a negative impact on equality in society. Poor, marginalized and socially backward people are the biggest victims of exploitation in the system, while rich, influential or people with political connections easily deal with the system. Justice, which should be fair and available to all, becomes a privilege for influential people. This not only increases inequality but also harms the basic principles of democracy, where every citizen has the right to equal protection before the law. Harassing, bullying and ignoring citizens by the police deepens social divisions, reduces trust in institutions and increases frustration with the government.
In serious cases, this combination of corruption and neglect can be life-changing. Victims of such crimes, which are not investigated or deliberately undermine the case, suffer prolonged mental stress, economic loss or social stigma. False accusations and custodial torture can devastate families and communities, leading to prolonged fear and insecurity. People learn how to bribe or avoid police rather than negotiate with them, leading to a culture of self-monitoring and helplessness. The common citizen, instead of relying on the police for security and justice, becomes alert, defensive and accepting of exploitation of the system.
In India, a common citizen faces the police in an atmosphere of fear, despair and helplessness. Demanding bribes to file complaints, manipulation of investigations and deliberate undermining of cases against poor people, make law enforcement a system of discriminatory justice. For the poor and marginalized, meeting the police is often exploitation rather than security, where custodial torture, false accusations and harassment are used as weapons of exploitation. In such systems, the basic promise of justice becomes dependent on economic resources or influence, leaving ordinary citizens vulnerable, distrustful and powerless. Unless corruption in the system is contained through structural reform, accountability and fair policing, the ordinary citizen will face a police that is not a giver of security, but a gatekeeper of access to justice, which is often inaccessible and discriminatory.
Corruption in the Indian police force is no longer limited to occasional bribery or wrongdoing; It has become a huge, organized and rooted business. Across the country, at every level, from village constables to senior officials of metros, bribery and corruption are no longer trivial or sudden, but have become a system that is a source of income. In many states, this corruption is so organized that it acts like a separate economy within the police force, with fixed methods, post-arrangements and rules, which are strictly followed. Now this is not just a mistake; Rather, it has become an organized and fixed task carried out with the connivance of officers of all ranks.
The biggest example of this organized corruption is “rate card” for police services. This is a list of fees known to common people, without any formal rules, which people have to pay even for minor services. For example, passport verification, which should actually be an easy administrative process, also requires money to be completed on time. Similarly, violation of traffic rules should be punished with a fine or warning as per law, but additional money also has to be paid to avoid fine or vehicle seizure. In even more serious cases, such as reporting minor incidents, fights between people or verification of legal documents, everything is decided by money: money has to be paid to get any action done or not. These “rate cards are widely spread among the common people, and they show that every citizen who contacts the police is actually doing a transaction in which it is necessary to pay money to get any work done.
This very systematic system is not limited to junior officers who meet the public directly. Constables, sub-inspectors or inspectors do not keep the money they collect entirely for themselves; This is distributed through the command chain to the top. Senior officials are not only aware of the amount collected, but in many cases they also actively participate in the distribution of this fund. This institutionally strengthens the practice of corruption: it becomes a shared responsibility and a secure job. Any attempt to break away from this system has serious consequences. Officials who refuse to take part in this organized corruption are isolated, excluded from promotion or transferred to a bad place. This clearly means: joining this system of corruption is essential to advancing in career and maintaining a job, and refusing it can put the job at risk.
The impact of implementing this business model is very deep on policing. First, it makes it almost impossible for honest officials to oppose corruption. The personal morality or honesty of officers who refuse to take part in corruption is not enough to protect them. The system is designed to reward those who participate and punish honest people. Even if an officer initially tries to work honestly, he is pressured to join the system soon, otherwise he is fired from the job. Over time, institutional culture itself becomes a pressing way, making corruption not an option but a must. In this way, the police force becomes a network of exploitation activities, where individual freedom is greatly reduced due to the organized structure of illegal activities.
Moreover, the scope of this corruption is huge. When many officials of different levels continuously take bribes for various works and services, the income from it becomes very high. This not only increases the desire to remain involved in corruption, but also to maintain and enhance this network. Senior officers are interested in maintaining the system by taking some part of the money received from their junior officers, which further strengthens corruption in the organization. Corrupt officials are no longer exceptions or bad people, but ordinary people, and are expected to engage in corruption from the top down. With this practice institutionalized, corruption continues not only for the tenure of officials but for many generations, and this trend continues forever.
This organized system also spoils the basic objective of policing. Far from protecting civilians, maintaining law and order or delivering justice, the police become a means of extortion. Every interaction between the common man and the police becomes a bargain, where rights and services depend on the greed for money. Common people, especially people from marginalized or economically weaker sections, are most affected by this. For them, it is difficult to get justice, basic security or administrative services without money. The police, instead of guarding the public good, start making money by selling security and action, further exacerbating inequality and social injustice.
The organized nature of this corruption makes reform efforts more difficult. Because this system benefits every rank of officer and is applicable from top to bottom, efforts for ethical standards, accountability based on merit, or independent monitoring often fail. Senior officials have a financial interest in maintaining the current situation, while lower officials fear action if they protest. Consequently, even good-intentioned reforms are often undermined or prevented, and civilians remain trapped in a cycle of exploitation. Without structural changes such as independent monitoring, transparent reporting and accountability on merit, this organized business of police corruption is unlikely to diminish.
Corruption has become a huge organized business in the Indian Police, with formal systems to recover money, distribution of earnings and strict rules to ensure compliance. From ‘rate cards’ for everyday services to distribution of money deposited in the command chain, this practice has become included in the organization itself. Honest officers are pressured, non-compliance with regulations is punished, and the purpose of policing is changed from security and justice to financial gain and exploitation. This size, organization and institutional form of this corrupt system not only makes it difficult to challenge, but also ensures its continuity. For ordinary citizens, dialogue with the police has become a persistent struggle to seek justice rather than a source of security, underscoring the urgent need for structural reforms and accountability mechanisms to end this deep-rooted corruption business.
The most worrying and dangerous aspect of corruption in the Indian police force is the deep, often secret, relationship between criminals and police officers. While the main job of law enforcers is to prevent crime, protect citizens, and enforce the law impartially, this important job is often hampered by a broad and organized nexus between authorities and criminals. This nexus, which works at multiple levels and in different ways, is one of the worst aspects of policing in India. This not only helps criminal networks thrive and survive, but also undermines the fundamental purpose of enforcing the law, making the police an institution that selectively promotes crime, rather than being an institution that protects society.
The crux of this problem is that many criminal organizations continue to thrive and grow because they receive the protection of part of the police. In return for regular payments – from cash bribes to promotions or other benefits – police officers give significant benefits to criminals. They may give sensitive information about ongoing investigations, warn of raids or surveillance, or deliberately ignore evidence of illegal activities. In some cases, the authorities can actively help criminals carry out their operations, whether by manipulating records, helping to transport illegal goods or providing physical protection. Such cooperation ensures that criminals can operate with impunity, while civilians remain vulnerable to their attacks.
Due to this secret security, illegal trade is flourishing. Gambling, which is legally prohibited, often runs openly in areas where police officers take regular payments from organizers. Trafficking networks, whether related to contraband goods, weapons or other illegal items, thrive because law enforcement enforces the law in a way that benefits those who can pay or have political connections. Trafficking in human beings, one of the most serious crimes against humanity, thrives because corrupt officials ignore the recruitment, transportation and exploitation of victims. Similarly, both local and interstate drugs trade thrives under the covert protection of the police. The result is a paradoxical situation in which it is those with responsibility for enforcing the law who play an active role in promoting criminal activities.
This relationship is not one-sided. Criminals know what protection they receive, so they often become informants or partners for the police, leading to a compromise that is beneficial to both, but morally corrupt. They provide information about opposing gangs, participate in sting operations, or help authorities take certain actions for political or financial interests. In turn, their own illegal activities are condoned or promoted. This creates a dangerous cycle: criminals gain power, influence and financial stability, while the police take control of the underworld and earn additional income from bribes and bribes. Over time, the distinction between law enforcement and lawbreaking becomes blurred, leading to the position that the line of right and wrong is not dictated by law, but by money, power and influence.
This criminal-police nexus has serious and far-reaching consequences for society. First, it undermines the idea of justice. When citizens see the police patronizing criminals, they naturally conclude that adherence to the law is selective: ordinary people are punished or pressured, while the rich, influential or strategically important remain unafraid. This leads to less confidence in law enforcement and, consequently, the State. People lose trust in the system and are less likely to report crimes, cooperate with investigations or seek justice for complaints. The notion that justice is served only by people with money or influence further exacerbates inequality and social injustice, undermining the foundations of democracy.
Second, this relationship creates an atmosphere of fear and insecurity. Citizens are caught between criminals and police officers who are involved in maintaining law and order. weaker sections – especially the poor, marginalized and socially backward – are left without any protection and are often the target of criminals and corrupt officials. Women, children and lower caste communities are particularly vulnerable to exploitation, harassment and violence. In such an environment, the law no longer constitutes a means of protecting rights, but a method of discrimination and repression, whereby ordinary citizens are constantly in a situation of vulnerability.
Furthermore, this nexus promotes widespread corruption in the police force. Officials who refuse to participate in these agreements, or try to enforce the law impartially, are often isolated, transferred or harassed. Over time, this promotes a culture where corruption and cooperation with criminals become commonplace. Moral policing becomes an exception, not the rule. New recruits are molded into systems where joining or taking advantage of criminal networks is considered an important part of their career. In this way the culture of the organization itself gets spoiled, which ensures that corruption continues for generations of police officers.
This nexus between criminals and the police destabilizes governance and public order. By openly allowing criminal networks to operate, the state loses control over the economy, social structure and civil life. Illegal trade dominates areas that must be controlled, reducing government revenues and denying citizens safe, legal alternatives. Political interference exacerbates this problem, as politicians often use these alliances to maintain power, rig elections, or suppress the opposition, and protect criminals from accountability by using them as tools for their work. In this way, this relationship between crime, politics and police creates a web of corruption that is difficult to eliminate.
The deep connection between criminals and police officers is one of the most dangerous and deadly aspects of corruption in Indian policing. Criminal networks thrive and grow because they receive protection from officials who take money, benefits, or other benefits in exchange for protection and help. From gambling and smuggling to human trafficking and the trade in drugs, illegal businesses thrive on this tacit collusion, while local criminals become both informants and partners for the police. This cycle undermines the fundamental purpose of policing, breaks the law and creates a society where ordinary citizens remain vulnerable, while the rich, powerful and influential work with impunity. In order to restore honesty and trust in law enforcement, this link has to be broken through structural reforms, independent monitoring, accountability mechanisms and cultural shifts in the police force, so that justice is prioritized over personal gain. Until these measures are implemented, this criminal-police nexus will continue to destroy the principles of law, equality and security, which are essential for a well-organized society.
Corruption in the Indian Police Department is not just a bad thing about the system, but it often becomes a part of the organizational culture, which is promoted and strengthened at many levels. Youth recruits join the police in the spirit of patriotism and social service, they want to protect the law and protect the citizens. They come from the point of view of justice and honesty, they feel that their role in the society will enable them to do something good. But, this initial enthusiasm is soon overshadowed by bad habits like bribery, favoritism and collusion, which are commonplace inside the police department. From the very first posting, they are faced with a culture where corruption is not considered a separate duty but an essential part of police work.
Senior officials play an important role in shaping this culture. Instead of teaching young officers about ethics, professional behavior, and public service, many senior officers ask them to engage in illegal recovery. They show, directly or through gestures, that adherence to these corrupt methods is the only way forward. Junior officers who hesitate or refuse to engage in bribery, extortion or other illegal activities are often punished. This may include sending them to distant or dangerous places, not giving them promotions, being harassed by colleagues, or spoiling their careers by making false accusations. This kind of pressure is very high, due to which young officers learn that honesty has its own value.
As a result, corruption is no longer just a moral mistake; It becomes a way of life. Officials call illegal activities their compulsion, not their choice. They justify taking bribes or extorting money from people by citing low salaries, which are often not enough to meet the cost of living in urban areas. lack of government resources—vehicles, equipment and testing equipment— further strengthens the belief that it is necessary to raise money through non-government means to do even normal work properly. Officials are made to feel that they will be at a disadvantage not only professionally but also personally if these methods are not used, as they have to raise money through these methods due to their low income.
This internal logic gradually has a deep impact on the behavior and thinking of the officers. What is initially adopted as a compulsion to “save life” gradually becomes a habit. Young executives, initially uncomfortable with behavior that does not follow ethical rules, gradually adopt these rules and accept them as the rules of their jobs. The arguments they make – getting money spent to get a position back, offsetting low salaries, or dealing with the system’s shortcomings – do not become temporary causes but permanent arguments. Over time, taking bribes, abusing authority, or favoritism, becomes more of a means to personal gain than a cost-of-living strategy. Greed, ambition and opportunism become part of professional identity and moral policing becomes the exception rather than the expectation.
This internal culture has many side effects. First, it further encourages corruption. When newcomers see their seniors getting involved in and promoting corruption, they also start considering it necessary to move ahead in their career. This system engages officials in a network where behavior that deviates from the rules is punished and rewarded for following them. Honest officials are ignored, harassed or pressured to quit, while those who engage in corruption are promoted and strengthen the power of corruption. In this way, this organization spreads corruption from generation to generation and it becomes difficult to make changes in the system.
Second, this culture overrides ethical and professional principles of policing. Officials no longer consider their main job to be to protect or judge citizens; Rather, they see their responsibility as economic gain, their safety and adherence to corrupt rules made by their seniors. In decision making, there is less importance of law or moral principles and more importance of personal gain, political pressure or security of the institution. Investigations are conducted arbitrarily, complaints are suppressed and action is taken against those who can pay money or have influence. In fact, this internal culture of corruption changes the police from an institution that follows the law impartially to an institution that works for its own interests, which has a negative impact on the common citizens.
Moreover, this internal system creates an atmosphere of fear, mistrust and despair inside the police force. Officials are always afraid that any attempt to work honestly can spoil their career and personal life. Promotion, deployment and identification are granted not on the basis of merit or ability, but on the basis of running alongside existing corrupt networks. The anxiety created by this environment reduces moral behavior, suppresses initiative and eliminates any attempts at improvement from within. In this way the culture of bribery and coercion reinforces itself: fear forces people to join, participation normalizes corruption and this normalization further increases fear.
Finally, this internal culture of corruption in the police force brings serious consequences not only for the officers but also for the society. Citizens have to face a police system in which even the best-intentioned officers remain tied due to pressure of position and expectation of involvement in illegal activities. Public trust is lost when people begin to understand that law enforcement is corrupt from within, causing ordinary citizens to become victims of exploitation, harassment and neglect. Without structural reforms involving salaries and accountability and mechanisms to protect honest officials, the culture of corruption in the police will persist, leaving non-ethical practices to take root and difficult to eradicate.
The culture of corruption in the Indian Police Force transforms the profession of honor and service into a system where bribery, favoritism and opportunism become common. Newly recruited soldiers inspired by ideals adapt to this culture due to pressure from senior officers and expectations of the system. Non-compliance with the rules leads to punishment, while involvement becomes a living strategy that gradually turns into greed. Low salaries, lack of resources and cost-of-living pressures further exacerbate corruption, creating an internal environment in which corruption becomes institutionalized and is passed on from generation to generation. Unless comprehensive reforms solve the problems of these systems, moral policing will remain an exception and corruption will remain the hallmark of the Force.
Systematic corruption in the Indian police force has one of the most dangerous and tragic consequences, custodial torture and human rights violations. While the main job of law enforcers should be to protect citizens, enforce the law and ensure justice, this role has completely changed due to corruption in the police. When money, influence and personal gain are valued more than fairness and legal duty, ordinary citizens – especially the poor, marginalized and vulnerable – become the main victims of a system tasked with protecting them. Therefore, custodial torture, fake encounters, arbitrary arrests and abuse of power are no longer rare incidents, but have become the common habit of corrupt and morally weak police systems.
The root of this problem is that corruption often turns police officers from protectors into tools of repression. In many cases, citizens who cannot pay bribes or meet the financial demands of the authorities are implicated in false criminal cases. These are not isolated incidents; patterns emerge throughout the country, in which poor and marginalized people are targeted because they do not have the resources to fight against or protest against corruption. Once accused, such people are subjected to non-human treatment in police custody. Physical torture, psychological pressure, and coercion are often used to extract a confession or confession. These confessions, which are often taken under duress, are used as legal evidence, further exacerbating injustice and further strengthening the cycle of repression.
This abuse extends well beyond isolated incidents of violence. Reports of custodial deaths, fake encounters and other such serious abuses have become very common in India. Citizens may be detained for long periods without due process, may not be granted the right to seek legal advice or may be subjected to severe corporal punishment. In extreme cases, police officers fake an encounter to eliminate suspects or make false accusations and say that the incidents were inevitable or committed in self-defense. Families of victims, already traumatized by the death or abuse of their loved ones, are often forced to remain silent by fear, intimidation and sometimes money. People do not pay attention to this due to fear of revenge and these wrongdoings continue without any hindrance, which creates an environment in the society which hollows it from within.
The consequences of this systematic violation of human rights are grave and of many kinds. On a humanitarian level, there is no yardstick for the suffering that innocent victims and their families suffer. Physical injury, long-lasting trauma, and social stigma are common outcomes. In addition to immediate suffering, these repressive acts erode confidence in law enforcement, worsening relations between citizens and the state. When it is those with responsibility for security who become repressive, ordinary citizens lose faith not only in the police but also in the institutions created to protect justice. The loss of this trust has a deep impact on governance and social cohesion, as law-abiding citizens begin to view the legal system as a method of repression rather than a means of protection.
The institutionalization of corruption is the main cause of these violations. Officials who rely on bribes and illegal payments for income or career advancement prefer financial gain to moral duty. Citizens’ legal rights become the subject of bargaining: those who can give money are easily treated, while those who cannot are abused and coerced. In police systems, custodial torture is often described as an essential way of obtaining statements, expediting investigations or showing efficiency, while ignoring its human and moral harm. Over time, these arguments become normal behavior and lead to brutality in the work culture of policing. Honest officials, who do not want to get involved, may be harassed or have their careers interrupted, reducing opposition against repressive methods.
Torture in custody and human rights violations also have a wide-ranging impact on society. When everyone knows about repressive incidents, fear and despair arise among the common people. Ordinary citizens hesitate to approach the police even when they are victims themselves, fearing that they will be harassed, threatened or implicated in a false case. This creates a dangerous vacuum in law enforcement, where crimes are not reported, criminals remain fearless and law-abiding citizens remain vulnerable. The notion that justice applies to discrimination—preference is given to rich, powerful or influential people— further increases social inequality and weakens the moral basis of society. This leads to frustration and anger, which can come in the form of social unrest, hooliganism, or a lack of civic cooperation.
The ethical and legal aspects are equally serious. Police who commit torture and human rights violations in custody actually break their social agreements with citizens. This institution, created to enforce the law, protect rights and ensure public safety, becomes an agent of fear, repression and violence. Such practices not only ruin the lives of the victims, but also destroy the values of society, and create an environment in which human dignity is daily insulted. Normalizing such abuses sends a message to society that power can be exercised without accountability, justice is conditional and the rights of vulnerable people are useless.
Torture and human rights violations in detention are among the most serious consequences of corruption in the Indian police. When the authorities prefer economic gain, private gain or political self-interest to justice, innocent civilians – especially the poor and marginalized – become the main victims. They are falsely accused, subjected to physical and mental torture and, in serious cases, murdered in custody. Families are silenced and communities intimidated, perpetuating a cycle of fear, arbitrariness and social injustice. These practices not only ruin people’s lives, but also reduce public trust, undermine society’s morals and transform the police from law-guarding to human rights violators. Unless corruption in the system is controlled through structural reforms, accountability mechanisms and independent monitoring, custodial torture and human rights violations will remain a serious and persistent problem of policing in India.
The corruption prevalent in the Indian police force has serious and far-reaching consequences, which are not limited to individual wrongdoings but also affect the basic principles of the society. When the very institution that protects the law and ensures justice is completely corrupted, it has a devastating effect on governance, social stability and the well-being of citizens. The general perception in India is that the overwhelming number of police employees – estimates often state up to 98 per cent – are involved in corrupt activities to varying degrees. Systemic corruption of this level is not merely the moral omission of individuals; it reflects the total failure of mechanisms that enforce the law, protect citizens and safeguard democratic values. When corruption becomes so widespread, the rule of law is undermined, and the notion of fairness and justice erodes, undermining citizens’ trust in the State and its institutions.
The most immediate and obvious consequence of this widespread corruption is the loss of trust between citizens and the police. For ordinary people, there is fear, uncertainty and frustration in talking to the police. When most officials are deemed corrupt, citizens cannot expect fair treatment, protection or assistance. Instead of going to the police for help, people often adopt alternative methods of protection. This may include having private security personnel, relying on local factions, or in extreme cases joining criminal gangs for protection. These methods may give short-term protection, but they fundamentally undermine the authority of the State. A society where citizens circumvent formal law enforcement for personal or community protection creates parallel mechanisms of power and protection, which undermine the legitimate authority of the State.
The loss of trust in law enforcement is worsened by the discriminatory use of justice, which gives greater benefits to the rich and influential. In a corrupt police system, financial influence, social status, and political relations often decide the outcome of legal proceedings. Rich people and influential institutions can buy immunity from litigation through bribery and collusion, manipulate investigations or even make favorable decisions. In contrast, the poor and marginalized, who do not have the resources to engage in such corrupt activities, remain vulnerable and without defence. This huge inequality strengthens the social system and further increases the existing inequalities. Justice, which should ideally be fair and equally accessible, becomes a commodity only for those who can afford it. Over time, the perception that rich people in the legal system receive special features creates anger, isolation, and social frustration in communities that are constantly denied security and justice.
The social consequences of such inequality are seen immediately and for a long time. At the practical level, where the way the law is implemented is not uniform and is biased, law and order and crime flourish. When citizens feel that legal avenues are useless or unjust, they often resort to illegal means such as taking the law into their own hands, forming factions, or negotiating with local criminals for safety or benefit. These methods can give temporary protection, but they also promote cycles of violence and revenge, leading to further instability in society. The State, which must be the guarantor of the system, is weakened and creates a climate where criminals, private militias and even those politically engaged operate without fear of accountability.
Over time, this situation causes widespread unrest in society. Communities constantly exploited, ignored or victimized by corrupt police officers tend to express their protests through demonstrations, strikes or public demonstrations. In extreme cases, these tensions escalate into riots, organized violence or insurgency. This cycle of corruption, inequality and public despair fuels instability, undermines administration and erodes the social contract between citizens and the State. When the law is regarded as a means of exploitation rather than of protection, democratic institutions have less legitimacy and the whole meaning of justice is lost.
Widespread corruption in the police also impacts economic and development aspects. In a society where the way laws are implemented is not trustworthy and fair, investment, innovation and entrepreneurship are not encouraged. Businesses, especially small or informal enterprises, may face extortion, harassment, or exploitation from officials seeking bribes. Investors are hesitant to operate in areas where legal protection is not fixed, slowing economic growth and reducing opportunities for citizens. In addition, corruption in law enforcement reduces the effectiveness of government policies, social welfare programmes and initiatives taken to improve public security. Resources allocated for public benefit are often diverted to wrongdoing by corrupt means, further exacerbating the situation of poverty and marginalized people.
The cultural and psychological effects on society are equally serious. Citizens become increasingly skeptical about the functionality of the law, the courts and the police. Common people begin to believe that honesty, security and justice can only be achieved through wealth, influence or friendship with criminals, which leads to despair in the society. This widespread frustration undermines social cohesion and erodes civic responsibility, creating an environment where law and order is perceived as normal and moral standards are eroded. Disbelief, suspicion and resentment cause communities to disintegrate, weakening social ties, while these ties are vital for a stable and harmonious society.
The consequences of widespread corruption in the Indian police force are not limited to personal wrongdoings. Most officers engaging in non-moral practices erodes the rule of law, reduces trust in law enforcement, and leads ordinary citizens to adopt other, often illegal, methods of protection. Corruption exacerbates social inequality, allowing the rich and powerful to buy justice, while the poor remain vulnerable, marginalized and frustrated. This imbalance fuels social discontent, unrest and violence, undermining the legitimacy of the State and undermining democratic institutions. The economic, social and cultural consequences further compound the disadvantages, creating a society where law and order is considered normal and justice becomes not a right but a privilege. Unless systemic corruption is contained through structural reforms, transparency and accountability, the impact of bribery and favoritism will continue to destabilize society, eroding the basic principles of trust, equality and governance.
Despite widespread corruption in the Indian police system, there are some officers who perform their duties, show honesty and work as per the law. These people are a ray of hope in an environment of bribery, favoritism and collusion with criminals and political interests. Their presence shows that the desire to serve honestly and professionally has not completely disappeared from the system, but the seriousness and manner of corruption makes their efforts very difficult. Policing is not just a job for these officers; it is a personal commitment to justice and moral responsibility, which they carry out in the face of institutional and social constraints.
Challenges to honest officers begin soon after they are recruited. New recruits with ideals of justice and public service face methods such as bribes, extortion, and political interference that dominate everyday functioning. While most partners easily join the corrupt system, these officials try to maintain integrity, not take bribes, abuse their authority for personal gain, or work under political pressure. This attitude of theirs makes them different, making them an exception in a system that runs on collective complicity. Instead of praise, they are often viewed with suspicion or hostility because their partners fear loss of their identity, increased accountability, or illegal income.
Honest officials face constant pressure not only from their colleagues but also from senior officials and political rulers. In many cases, senior officials consider ethical behavior to be wrong and a threat to illegal networks of corruption and the flow of illegal income. Political leaders, who rely on easily run police officers to advance their personal, party or financial agendas, are often hostile to independent officers who refuse to follow instructions that violate the law. Honest officers may be repeatedly warned, quietly threatened, or openly threatened to force them to obey. This pressure is so great that maintaining integrity becomes a constant struggle, requiring extraordinary stamina, courage, and determination.
Transfers and promotions are among the most common ways to weaken honest officers. Officers who refuse to engage in corrupt activities or resist political pressure are often transferred as punishment. They may be sent away from urban centers, to difficult or unwanted places, where they cannot exert their influence or advance their careers. These transfers are often aimed at sidelining those challenging the current system, isolating them from support networks and preventing other officials from behaving like them. In addition to professional marginalization, these officers may also face deliberate interruption in promotions, performance appraisals and career advancement. In fact, this system punishes honesty and promotes corruption, making it a difficult task for honest officers to survive.
In addition to professional challenges, honest officers often face threats and harassment that also affect their personal lives. In some cases, criminal gangs may harass those who expect the police to turn a blind eye to illegal activities. They may also receive threats to exert psychological pressure and force obedience by targeting family members or community members. The combined effect of professional marginalization, corruption in the system and personal oppression creates an environment in which moral policing is not only difficult but can also be dangerous. Surviving professionally and personally is a difficult task, requiring constant vigilance, strategic thinking and moral courage.
Despite these difficult challenges, the stories of these officers convey the powerful message that change is possible. His dedication shows that it is possible to work honestly even in a system full of wrong methods. They show that personal courage can bring about real change, whether it is ensuring justice in a case, exposing corruption, or guiding and advising other officials who lean toward ethical behavior. Every small and big act of honesty contributes to maintaining moral values and gives hope that institutional reforms and accountability mechanisms can finally take root.
However, due to the deep roots of corruption, the influence of these officers remains limited. With its strong network of bribes, collusion and political interference, the police institution continues to crush reform efforts. Personal honesty may be plausible, but it cannot overcome structural shortcomings, poor policies or bureaucratic pressure that promote wrong behaviour. Without independent monitoring, promotion on merit, transparent checks and mechanisms to protect informants, honest officials fight their battles alone. Therefore, their successes remain weak, they fear revenge and they are often small.
The presence of honest officers in the Indian police force is a ray of hope in such a corrupt system. These people act with courage, honesty, and a sense of moral duty, often by endangering their personal and professional lives. They face constant pressure, transfers, threats and career interruptions from colleagues, senior officials and political officials. His fight for moral behavior even in adverse circumstances proves that positive change is possible at the individual level. Nevertheless, without system reform and institutional support, these authorities remain the exception and the culture of corruption that pervades the police force continues to challenge their efforts. His stories remind society that while honesty may exist, systems must change to protect and empower these rare examples, so that honesty can become a viable path without being a hard and dangerous fight.
The current condition of the Indian Police Department reflects a system that is in dire need of comprehensive and revolutionary reforms. Decades of corruption, political interference and institutional negligence have undermined both the effectiveness and credibility of law enforcement. In its current condition, the police force is not able to perform its core functions like protecting citizens, protecting the law and maintaining public trust. Corruption is no longer limited to personal wrongdoing, but it has become a structural and systemic problem prevalent at all levels of the department. Without concerted action and thorough restructuring, this pattern of such non-ethical behaviour and inefficiency could continue, undermining the rule of law and further undermining public trust in the justice system. This level of corruption, and the culture of prioritizing personal gain and political loyalty over professional duty, make reform an urgent necessity.
Reforms should begin by reducing political interference in police functioning. Across India, law enforcement officers often serve as tools of political power rather than as independent law enforcers. Promotion, transfer and even working priorities are dictated by political considerations rather than merit or public interest. Officials who oppose this interference risk being penalized by relocation, harassment, or marginalization, while those who follow it are rewarded in the form of good positions and career advancement. This politicization creates a culture in which loyalty to political leaders outweighs duty to the public, leading to increased corruption and eroded professional impartiality. Therefore, reforms should establish mechanisms that ensure freedom of functioning, protect officials from unnecessary political pressure and prevent political parties from using the police for their own personal purposes. Only by keeping law enforcement away from political interference can officers work impartially and serve the public interest.
Another important aspect of the reform is to ensure transparent and merit-based recruitment. Currently, recruitment processes in many states are not transparent, leading to bias, nepotism and corruption in the selection of officers. This leads to the recruitment of people who prefer personal gain to moral behavior. Transparent recruitment processes based on fair criteria and competitive examinations can help in attracting talented, dedicated and morally honest candidates. Ensuring fairness at the time of recruitment is important as it lays the foundation for a professional and accountable police force, creating a workforce more dedicated to opposing corruption and protecting the law.
Apart from recruitment, it is also important to provide better salaries and working conditions to the policemen. Low salaries, late payments and lack of resources often force officials to earn income through extralegal means such as bribes and extortion. The state can reduce economic incentives for corruption by providing proper salaries, allowances and professional assistance. Better pay and working conditions show respect for the profession and boost the morale of the officers, thereby instilling a sense of pride and responsibility in them. Together with ethical training and a culture of accountability, these measures can help prevent corruption.
Technology can play an important role in improving the processes of policing. Digitization of processes such as FIR registration, case tracking, resource management and internal audit can reduce discretion and limit opportunities for corruption. Automated systems increase transparency, allowing civilians to monitor progress and reduce human interference with routine tasks. Technology helps in more efficient investigation, better record-keeping and impartial evaluation of officers’ performance, making it easier to enforce accountability. In addition, surveillance, body cameras and electronic reporting mechanisms can prevent abuse, ensuring that there is a record of and review of wrongdoing. Thus, the integration of modern technological tools with traditional policing methods can enhance integrity, efficiency and public confidence.
However, technological solutions and structural adjustments alone are not enough. Reform requires strong political will, which is not often the case in India. Many politicians profit from corrupt police systems, using it to gain loyalty, manipulate investigations, and maintain control over local and state power. This vested interest in the current situation makes meaningful reform very difficult. Political resistance must be countered by pressure from civil society, civil movements and the judiciary, all of which can serve as catalysts for change. Judiciary interventions, public awareness campaigns, media monitoring and sustained civic activism, are essential to holding police and political officials accountable. Only when many stakeholders, including conscious and assertive citizens, demand reform can the necessary political impetus for change in the system arise.
As well as external pressure, internal accountability mechanisms must be strengthened. It is important to establish independent monitoring institutions, complaint authorities and internal audit systems to monitor the functioning of the police and promptly identify and punish corruption. The authorities must be aware that there will be consequences for inappropriate behaviour, regardless of their position or political relationship. Transparent disciplinary processes and protection of informers can create an environment where honesty is encouraged and wrongdoing is prevented. This combination of internal and external monitoring is essential to break the cycle of corruption that has long prevailed in the police force.
Changes in the Indian Police Department require a multi-level approach. Reducing political interference, ensuring recruitment on the basis of merit, raising salaries, using technology and establishing strong accountability mechanisms are important components of the reform. But, even the best reforms cannot succeed without the commitment and courage to implement them. Therefore, the role of citizens, civil society and the judiciary in constantly pressing for change is crucial. This challenge is enormous, but history shows that when moral leadership, public participation and institutional reform come together, systemic corruption can be overcome. Reforming the police is not just an administrative necessity; It is necessary to maintain the principles of democracy in India, restore justice and regain public confidence. Until these reforms are effectively implemented, corruption will continue to take root and the police force will fail to shoulder its main responsibility to protect civilians and maintain law and order.
Currently, the Indian Police Department is facing an unprecedented crisis. Corruption in the police has increased so much that it now defines the nature of policing in the country. It is estimated that some 98 per cent of police personnel are involved in some form of corruption, be it minor bribery or large-scale organized criminal collusion. This widespread corruption turns an institution, which was originally intended to protect and serve the people, into a mechanism of exploitation and control. Citizens, who rely on the police for security, justice and protection, become victims of abuse, exploitation and extortion at every level. The basic role of the police as defenders of law and order has now been transformed by a system that prioritizes personal gain, political loyalty and institutional survival rather than the public interest.
Corruption in the police takes many forms, and each has its own devastating impact on society. At the general level, ordinary citizens pay meager bribes in tasks ranging from filing First Information Reports (FIRs) to seeking help in minor disputes. Such small acts of corruption reduce the credibility of the police and create an environment in which citizens start considering bribery as an essential part of civilian life. But corruption extends far beyond trivial transactions. Many police officers engage in organized criminal activities by patronizing illegal activities such as gambling, smuggling, drug smuggling, human trafficking and extortion. In return for regular payments, officials give out important information, ignore criminal activities or actively participate in illegal activities. This link between law enforcement and criminal networks creates a dangerous situation: while the poor and powerless are subjected to harassment, abuse and false accusations, criminals and influential people remain almost completely innocent.
Political interference only exacerbates the problem. Across India, police officers are often seen as tools of political power rather than independent enforcers of law. Decisions such as promotion, transfer and operational priorities are often decided by politicians rather than merit or public interest. Officials who resist this pressure are subject to transfer, harassment, or condoning as punishment, while those who follow suit receive lucrative positions, career advancement, or other benefits. This culture of political subordination reduces professionalism, prioritizes loyalty over ability and creates an environment where corruption thrives. The result was that the primary loyalty of the police force did not turn to the public, but to political leaders and their own personal interests.
The consequences of such systemic corruption are devastating and far-reaching. Public trust in law enforcement has eroded, and civilians are now increasingly viewing the police as repressors rather than defenders. Ordinary people often do not report crimes for fear of harassment, coercion, or demands for bribes. Sensitive cases such as sexual violence, domestic violence, discrimination on the basis of caste and property disputes are often ignored or tampered with, leaving victims helpless. Lack of trust is not limited to policing: when law enforcement does not do justice, the legitimacy of the state is also questioned, undermining democracy and social cohesion. Communities begin to rely on alternative methods for protection, such as private security firms, vigilante groups or even criminal gangs, further weakening State power and perpetuating violence and law and order problems.
Despite this disappointing truth, some honest officers still struggle even in difficult circumstances. These people try to maintain the principles of justice and honesty even in an environment full of greed, political interference and systemic corruption. Their courage, dedication and moral behavior are rare examples of what policing can be like, showing that change is possible even in difficult situations. But it is very difficult for these officers to survive. They are put under a lot of pressure by corrupt colleagues, high officials and political people. Many officers are repeatedly transferred, their careers are stopped, they are threatened or harassed, so that they cannot work independently. For them, policing becomes an individual conflict rather than a collective institutional effort, highlighting the structural shortcomings encountered in comprehensive reforms.
The future of law enforcement in India will remain bleak unless immediate and radical reforms are undertaken. Combating corruption requires a multi-level approach, preventing political interference, ensuring recruitment and promotion on the basis of merit, improving pay and work conditions and establishing stringent mechanisms of accountability and monitoring. Technology can also play an important role in digitizing processes, reducing discretion, increasing transparency and tracking the functioning of authorities. Equally important are public participation, the mobilization of civil society and judicial oversight in generating the political and social will necessary for meaningful change.
Accepting the bitter truth is the first step towards change. The level of corruption in the Indian police is huge, and it can no longer be ignored. Change will require courage, honesty and collective effort from all citizens, institutions and policy makers. The challenges may be big, but the presence of honest officials in the system shows that change is possible. By implementing systemic reforms, promoting ethical behavior and creating mechanisms for accountability, the Indian Police can gradually develop into a service-oriented institution that protects citizens, maintains justice and strengthens the foundation of democracy. This work is huge, but without it this cycle of corruption, exploitation and distrust will continue, which will continue to have a negative impact on law and order in India.
Read Also:
As we know that SEO is very important for any website. Unless you do SEO…
When it comes to SEO, mostly On Page SEO and Off Page SEO are discussed.…
What is Technical SEO? In today's time, every business owner wants his website to get…
In today's time, the importance of SEO in digital marketing has increased a lot. While…
Everyone wants to be successful in life. Something good has to be done in everyone's…
Life's true that any person wants to be successful. Everybody wants to spend successful life.…