ANANTAPUR: Despite Tadipatri’s known history of faction feuds and frequent clashes, the Intelligence Bureau (IB) or the Special Branch (SB) seems to have failed to provide timely alerts to higher authorities. This has raised significant concerns, and led to widespread astonishment within the department that only the three officers were held accountable, while the SB and IB faced no consequences for the poll violence.
Following the violent incidents during the general elections in Tadipatri, an internal debate has sparked within the police department over the suspension of key officers, including the District SP, Tadipatri DSP and Tadipatri Urban Police Station CI. There is growing discussion on why no action was taken against the IB and SB, which are crucial for ground-level intelligence gathering.
The debate centres on the perceived failures of the IB and SB in providing essential intelligence that could have prevented the violence. These wings are supposed to act as the eyes and ears of the police, identifying potential troublemakers and problematic areas well in advance.
However, in the case of Tadipatri, their failure to foresee and report the potential trouble has raised significant concerns. The violent incidents began near a church school on the polling day, escalating into a major clash at Om Shanti Nagar. The following night, TDP cadres attacked YSRC worker Sanjeev in the ninth ward, leading to further violence.
There is widespread astonishment within the department that only three officers were held accountable while the IB and SB faced no consequences. Even some retired officials criticised this move, demanding action against the officers responsible for intelligence failure. The debate has also led to speculation about whether the intelligence inputs were ignored or underestimated by the higher authorities, raising questions about possible underlying conspiracy angle.
Some argue that effective control of law and order could have been achieved with proactive measures based on intelligence reports. The failure to identify and counsel problematic villages before the elections is seen as a significant lapse. Voices within the department are advocating for holding IB and SB accountable to prevent such failures in future.
The Tadipatri incident and its aftermath have highlighted the critical need for effective intelligence and the importance of holding all responsible parties accountable for lapses if any.
Lapse in counselling problematic villages
Some argue that effective control of law and order could have been achieved with proactive measures based on intelligence reports. The failure to identify and counsel problematic villages before the elections is seen as a significant lapse