The recent murder of a temple worker in Sivaganga, Tamil Nadu, exemplifies a systemic crisis. The Madras High Court noted evidence tampering, including manipulated CCTV footage, and described the local police as 'unsafe custodians' of evidence.
Published Jul 18, 2025 | 3:35 PM ⚊ Updated Jul 18, 2025 | 3:35 PM
The minimum educational requirement for police constables should be raised from 10th standard to a bachelor’s degree.
Synopsis: In today’s world, policing has evolved beyond a generalist role where basic training alone could suffice. It has become a specialised profession that demands a scientific understanding of crime and criminal behaviour. This knowledge cannot be adequately provided through post-recruitment training alone.
The custodial murder of Ajith Kumar, a 27-year-old temple security guard in Sivaganga, Tamil Nadu, on 28 June, has sparked widespread public outrage and exposed critical flaws in India’s police system.
Suspected of jewellery theft, Kumar sustained 50 extrenal injuries, and autopsy findings showed haemorrhages in the stomach lining, pulmonary trunk and right lobe of the liver, pointing to prolonged physical torture.
The Madras High Court, in a sharp critique, observed that “even a murderer would not have caused this many injuries.” This tragic incident cannot be construed as an isolated occurrence but reflects a deeper systemic problem.
It is often overlooked by public debate and expert commentary, which fail to address the inadequate training and professionalisation of frontline police personnel.
Custodial deaths remain a persistent human rights concern globally, and India is no exception. According to data from Lok Sabha questions, Tamil Nadu reported 36 custodial deaths in police custody between 2018 and 2023.
Comprehensive national and state-level crime data for 2023 and 2024 are unavailable, necessitating reliance on parliamentary questions, as the State Crime Records Bureaux and the National Crime Records Bureau have not yet released crime statistics for those years.
Custodial deaths are not solely the result of physical torture. They encompass various causes when an accused is in police custody, including suicides, deaths due to pre-existing illnesses or during hospital treatment, injuries sustained before custody, physical assaults by police, deaths while attempting to escape custody and fatalities from road accidents.
Media reports and subsequent public debate often oversimplify this issue, fostering the impression that all custodial deaths stem from police torture.
Data from Tamil Nadu Police between 2010 and 2022 reveal that only three custodial deaths were officially attributed to physical assault by police personnel (one in 2013 and two in 2014), with no such cases reported in other years.
Notably, in 2013, one police officer was convicted for a custodial death. However, these official figures are more likely to underrepresent the true extent of custodial violence.
Official data only capture deaths directly attributed to police torture, excluding injuries inflicted during investigations that may not immediately result in death.
This suggests a far graver reality than statistics indicate, compounded by recurring patterns of violence and a culture of impunity within the police department.
The Ajith Kumar case exemplifies this systemic crisis. The Madras High Court noted evidence tampering, including manipulated CCTV footage, and described the local police as “unsafe custodians” of evidence.
In response, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin transferred the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to ensure transparency, and five police personnel allegedly responsible for Kumar’s death were arrested and charged with murder.
While these steps demonstrate accountability, they address the symptoms rather than the root causes of custodial violence.
A fundamental issue in India’s police system is the disparity in training quality across ranks. Indian Police Service (IPS) officers, who primarily serve as managers, receive comprehensive training in scientific investigation and interrogation at the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National Police Academy (SVPNPA).
In contrast, State Police Service officers, such as those in the Tamil Nadu Police Service (TPS), undergo less rigorous training compared to IPS officers at their respective state police academies. Sub-inspectors and constables receive even less specialised training.
Constables, trained in temporary “Police Recruit Schools” rather than academies, follow curricula designed for a 10th-standard education level, which is inadequate for the demands of modern policing.
Many may wonder what is wrong with IPS officers receiving state-of-the-art training compared to other entrants in the police department. They should receive such training, no doubt. But the opportunity for them to put the scientific investigation and interrogation skills they have acquired to use in the field is minimal compared to sub-inspectors and constables.
This is yet another example of a larger impediment caused by a top-down approach. Such an outdated criterion means merely “executing orders” from superiors rather than encouraging critical thinking.
In addition, effective policing at the police station level requires ethical decision-making and an understanding of human rights and psychology – skills that current training does not sufficiently provide.
This training gap has serious consequences. Sub-inspectors and constables handle most ground-level criminal investigations and public interactions, yet they are the least equipped to do so professionally.
A retired Director General of Police (DGP) from Tamil Nadu recently highlighted in an interview the need for scientific investigation and interrogation at the police station level. However, expecting constables with minimal policing education to meet these standards is unrealistic.
The reliance on methods such as third-degree interrogation, as seen in Ajith Kumar’s case, stems from this lack of training. The absence of skills in de-escalation and evidence-based policing increases the likelihood of custodial violence.
To address this systemic issue, the minimum educational requirement for police constables should be raised from 10th standard to a bachelor’s degree.
Tamil Nadu’s Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) for higher education is 47 percent, indicating that nearly half of the eligible population has access to college education.
This makes it feasible to recruit candidates capable of undergoing advanced training in scientific investigation and interrogation techniques. A degree-level education would equip constables with the understanding necessary for modern policing.
While exceptional individuals with only 10th or 12th-standard education may excel in policing, such cases cannot justify maintaining low educational standards for the majority.
For sub-inspectors, who lead investigations and manage police stations, a postgraduate degree in criminology should be made mandatory, or a specific quota should be established for criminology postgraduates in SI recruitment.
Criminology is essential because it offers a deep understanding of crime causation, criminal behaviour and the dynamics of the justice system, enabling a professional and compassionate approach to policing. In today’s world, policing has evolved beyond a generalist role where basic training alone could suffice.
It has become a specialised profession that demands a scientific understanding of crime and criminal behaviour. This knowledge cannot be adequately provided through post-recruitment training alone.
Instead, it requires comprehensive higher education in criminology to equip officers with the skills needed to address emerging challenges effectively. Like doctors, engineers and lawyers, who are specialised professionals, policing now requires a similar level of expertise.
My experience illustrates this point. A junior from my university, where I earned my master’s in criminology, serves as a sub-inspector in the Tamil Nadu Police. While on night patrol in Chennai city, he witnessed a senior sub-inspector arbitrarily slapping boys from a particular locality to “instil fear.”
My junior, drawing on his criminological training, challenged this unprofessional behaviour, highlighting the futility of fear-based tactics, the dangers of stereotyping, and the importance of due process and upholding the dignity of individuals.
This example demonstrates how specialised criminology education fosters a professional mindset, producing officers who prioritise professionalism over the current command-and-control model that emphasises asserting authority.
By integrating criminology postgraduates into the police force, particularly at the SI level, we can foster a culture of professionalism and accountability, reducing reliance on coercive methods like custodial torture.
While these changes may not eliminate custodial deaths entirely, they would significantly reduce their occurrence, fostering a police force that upholds human rights and public trust.
The time for reform is now, as lives, liberty and dignity depend on a policing system that prioritises professionalism and accountability.
(The writer is a social and behavioural science researcher. Edited by Dese Gowda)
