The Delhi Police recently carried out an exercise named Operation Gang Bust claiming they have arrested over 500 criminals. How does that help crime scenario in the national capital.
The crimes which occupy bold spaces like the murder of a Residents Welfare Association woman president in chief minister Rekha Gupta’s constituency is typical example of policing having gone wrong at local level
Delhi’s constitutional status as a Union Territory with an assembly has long produced a governance inconsistency. Citizens elect a government with expectations of safety, order and responsive administration, yet some critical levers of authority like policing remain outside the control of that government.
The result is a blurred accountability structure where power and responsibility are misaligned, and where failures in law and order often fall into an institutional no-man’s land. Under the current arrangement, public order and police are vested with the Centre through the MHA, while the elected government is left to manage the consequences like public anger, political fallout and a crisis of confidence.
This structural disconnect is increasingly visible in Delhi’s everyday crime scenario. To be clear, Delhi today is not facing any extraordinary security emergency. There is no surge of terror activity or insurgent violence that demands exclusive, centralised micromanagement.
The city instead is grappling with crimes that are local, familiar and deeply personal like murders, extortion, neighbourhood disputes turning violent, and intimidation of community leaders. These are precisely the kinds of offences that require intimate local intelligence, sustained beat policing and swift accountability at the district level.
The murder in Shalimar Marg is illustrative of what has gone wrong. Such a crime is not just an individual tragedy; it is a warning signal of eroding community safety. It reflects failures in preventive policing, intelligence gathering and grievance redressal. Such failures that accumulate over time culminate in a crime most foul like murder. Unfortunately when such an incident occurs, the chain of accountability instead of tightening it scatters.
For the Delhi Police, administrative control ultimately lies with the Centre. A grave local crime may not ring alarm bells in the distant corridors of North Block or Sewa Sadan with the same urgency it would in the Delhi Secretariat.
Conversely, the elected government has little operational authority over policing outcomes.
There is no empowered grievance redressal mechanism through which residents can seek immediate corrective action from their elected representatives. This absence weakens public trust and fuels a sense of helplessness among both citizens and local leaders.
Defenders of the current model argue that central control ensures neutrality and protects the police from political interference. This concern is valid and must be preserved. But neutrality does not require insulation from all forms of democratic accountability. Many federal capitals around the world have evolved hybrid models, where strategic control and standards are centralised, while operational accountability is shared with locally elected authorities.
Delhi needs a similar rethinking. The MHA must undertake a serious review of the capital’s policing structure with a view to introducing layered accountability. This could include institutionalised coordination mechanisms between the police and the elected government, empowered local safety councils, and transparent performance benchmarks for district policing. The goal should not be political control, but political answerability.
Further, community-oriented policing must be strengthened. Crimes with local motives demand local solutions like trusted beat officers and early-warning systems for simmering disputes. When community leaders are threatened or attacked, it should automatically trigger high-level review and intervention.
Ultimately, Delhi’s citizens do not care which government controls the police; what they care about is feeling safe in their neighbourhoods. Delhi deserves a policing system that is as responsive as it is robust, and as accountable as it is impartial.
Sidharth Mishra, the author and president of the Centre for Reforms, Development & Justice.