THE CASE FOR A NATIONAL POLICE AGENCY (NPA) IN INDIA: BRIDGING JURISDICTIONAL DIVIDES

NPA will be mandated to help the state enforcement agencies to solve specific cross-border crimes of the types whose investigations are generally hampered by jurisdictional issues. Its role will be largely facilitative rather than being operational.

IN SHORT

The essay examines the case for establishing a National Police Agency in India, focusing on the coordination model as used by the FBI that maintains strong state/local policing, while countries like France have a more centralized approach with their National Police and Gendarmerie. The mandated role of NPA would address:

1.    The current jurisdictional limitations that hamper cross-border investigations

2.    The data fragmentation issues across state police forces

3.    The specific challenges state authorities face when crimes cross boundaries

4.    The key drivers necessitating better coordination:

• The explosion of cybercrime

• Trading of illicit liquor

• Smuggling of firearms

• Complex business and financial crimes spanning multiple states

• Petty and organized crimes

The essay emphasizes how the proposed authority would respect India's federal structure while providing the critical coordination mechanisms needed to address these modern challenges. It has highlighted the jurisdiction issue as particularly problematic - how crimes that cross state lines often fall into investigative gaps, with each state police force limited in its ability to pursue cases beyond its borders.

INTRODUCTION

India's federal structure has long allocated primary responsibility for law enforcement to individual states, a principle established in the Constitution and maintained throughout the nation's democratic history. While this arrangement respects the diversity and autonomy of India's states, it has created significant challenges in addressing criminal activities that transcend state boundaries.

The increasing sophistication of cross-border crimes, the rise of cybercrime and the newer types of technology enabled crimes, and the persistent threat of organized crime have exposed critical gaps in India's law enforcement framework.

This essay examines the need for a National Police Agency in India, one that would work alongside state police forces to facilitate inter-state coordination, expedite data sharing, and strengthen the collective response to threats that no single state can effectively combat alone.

CURRENT VOIDS IN CROSS-BORDER LAW ENFORCEMENT

Jurisdictional Limitations

Perhaps the most significant obstacle to effective law enforcement in India is the jurisdictional constraint that hinders investigations crossing state lines. When crimes span multiple states, investigations often falter at borders where one state's police authority ends and another's begins. This jurisdictional fragmentation creates several problems:

• Investigations requiring action in multiple states face procedural delays as permissions are sought from each jurisdiction

• Evidence collection across state lines becomes cumbersome, often compromising the integrity of cases

• Criminals deliberately operate across state boundaries to exploit these jurisdictional gaps

• Victims must navigate multiple police departments, each with different procedures and priorities

• The practical effect is that many cross-border cases remain un-investigated or are pursued with significantly reduced effectiveness. A case that begins in Maharashtra but continues into Gujarat and Rajasthan may require coordination between three different police forces, each with its own leadership, priorities, and procedures. Without a formal mechanism to bridge these divides, investigations lose momentum and criminals escape accountability.

  
  

Data Fragmentation

India lacks a truly integrated national criminal database system that provides real-time information sharing across states. While efforts like the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network & Systems (CCTNS) have made progress, implementation remains inconsistent. This results in:

• Inability to quickly identify patterns of criminal activity spanning multiple states

• Duplication of investigative efforts as each state works in relative isolation

• Delayed recognition of connected cases that might point to organized criminal operations

• Incomplete criminal histories when offenders move between states

  
  

When criminals operate across state lines, they effectively exploit this data fragmentation by establishing operations in regions where their previous activities remain unknown to local authorities.

HELPLESSNESS OF STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

• Resource Limitations

• Procedural Hurdles

• Political Complications

KEY DRIVERS NECESSITATING A NATIONAL POLICE AGENCY

• Cybercrime Explosion

• Complex Financial and Business Crimes

• Cross Border Petty and Organized Crimes

NATIONAL POLICE AGENCY – OPERATIONAL BOUNDARIES

1.    Intelligence and Analysis Focus

• Collect, analyse, and share intelligence across state borders

• Identify patterns in cross-border criminal activities

• Provide analytical support using advanced tools and methodologies

• Maintain comprehensive databases accessible to state police

  
  

2.    Facilitative Rather Than Operational

• Serve as a coordination hub for interstate investigations

• Provide technical expertise and specialized knowledge when requested

• Enable smooth information exchange between state police forces

• Develop standardized protocols for interstate operations

  
  

3.    Limited Field Presence

• Deploy intelligence assets for information gathering only

• Avoid direct operational roles that could overlap with state police

• Participate in joint operations only at the invitation of state authorities

• Maintain liaison officers with state police rather than parallel field teams

  
  

This approach would address the cross-border coordination needs without creating a parallel investigative structure that might compete with or undermine state police authority. It recognizes that state police forces have the local knowledge, community connections, and constitutional mandate to lead investigations within their territories.

The NPA would add value through its interstate perspective and specialized capabilities while carefully avoiding territorial encroachment that could generate resistance or resentment from state authorities.

Addressing the Jurisdiction Challenge

The jurisdiction issue represents perhaps the most compelling reason for establishing a National Police Agency. Currently:

• First Information Reports (FIRs) filed in one state often face rejection when elements of the crime occurred elsewhere

• Victims are frequently directed to file complaints in multiple jurisdictions, creating barriers to justice

• Police officers must obtain special permissions to pursue investigations across state lines

• Evidence collected in one state may face admissibility challenges in courts of another state

  
  

The proposed Agency would directly address these issues by:

• Creating clear protocols for determining lead jurisdiction in multi-state cases

• Establishing mechanisms for transferring investigative authority when appropriate

• Providing legal frameworks that ensure evidence admissibility across state lines

• Eliminating the "jurisdiction shopping" that allows criminals to evade accountability

  
  

ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF AN ORDINARY INDIAN

The powers of the National Police Agency be defined regarding complaint registration in these ways:

1.    Direct FIR Registration Powers

• Authority to register FIRs directly for specific categories of cross-border crimes (cybercrime, petty and organized crime network, business and financial crimes)

• Jurisdiction to initiate investigations when crimes clearly span multiple states

• Ability to take over cases that demonstrably require centralized investigation

  
  

2.    Escalation Mechanism

• Formal process for citizens to appeal to the NPA when state police refuse to register FIRs for cross-border crimes

• Authority to direct state police to register FIRs when evidence indicates interstate elements

• Power to review rejected complaints and override state decisions when jurisdictional issues are the primary reason for rejection

  
  

3.    Oversight Function

• Monitoring of cross-border crime patterns to identify systemic failures in FIR registration

• Authority to audit state police compliance with FIR registration guidelines for interstate crimes

• Regular reporting on jurisdictional disputes and their resolution

This framework would address a significant problem in India's current system - victims of cross-border crimes often find themselves shuttled between police stations, with each claiming the crime falls outside their jurisdiction. By providing a clear escalation path and defined authority to register FIRs for specific categories of interstate crimes, the NPA would close this accountability gap.

ADDRESSING POTENTIAL CRITICISM: DISTINGUISHING THE NPA FROM THE NIA

The National Investigation Agency's (NIA) Current Role

The NIA's mandate is to investigate and prosecute offences that affect India's sovereignty, security, and integrity, including terrorism, terror funding, and other related crimes specified in the NIA Act, 2008. Its jurisdiction includes cross-border crimes in India encompassing various illicit activities, including cybercrimes, money laundering, smuggling and trading of illicit firearms, drug trafficking, organized crime, and human trafficking.

The primary focus of the NIA is investigating and prosecuting cases related to cross-border terrorism, including terrorist attacks, funding of terrorism, and other terror-related crimes. It also serves as the nodal agency at the central level for the investigation of terror funding and fake Indian currency notes (FICN).

Under current provisions, the Central Government can direct the NIA to investigate a scheduled offence in any state in coordination with state law enforcement agencies. The NIA has the authority to prosecute cases in specially designated NIA courts.

Anticipating Criticism: Addressing the Question of Overlap

Critics of establishing a National Police Agency may point to potential overlap with the NIA's activities. However, several core differences between the proposed NPA and the existing NIA demonstrate the distinct and necessary role the NPA would fulfil:

Key Distinctions Between NPA and NIA (And Other Central Law Enforcing Agencies)

Investigation Initiation: The NPA would be mandated to initiate investigation of specific cases related to cross border issues either on the request of of the State Law Enforcing Agencies or Central Government. In contrast, the NIA investigates only on the direction of the Central Government.

Scope and Focus: While the NPA would investigate interstate criminal activities typically outside the jurisdiction of state law enforcing agencies—particularly matters related to business and financial crimes, cyber-crimes, illicit trading, and both petty and organized crimes—the focus of the NIA remains more narrowly defined to protect sovereignty, security, and integrity with a larger emphasis on terrorism.

These distinctions highlight why the proposed National Police Agency would complement rather than duplicate the work of the NIA, filling critical gaps in India's current approach to cross-border crime that falls outside the NIA's terrorism-focused mandate.

CONCLUSION

India's state-centred approach to law enforcement has served many purposes well, but it increasingly falls short in addressing the complex, cross-border nature of modern crime. The establishment of a National Police Agency focused on coordination and information-sharing represents a balanced approach that respects India's federal structure while addressing critical gaps in the current system.

As cybercrime continues to rise, terrorist threats persist, and financial criminals grow more sophisticated, the costs of inaction continue to mount. Citizens find themselves caught in jurisdictional disputes while seeking justice, investigations stall at state borders, and criminals exploit these systemic vulnerabilities. A National Police Agency would provide the connective tissue needed between the police forces of different states, enabling them to work together more effectively while maintaining their constitutional roles.

The path forward requires careful attention to federal principles, respect for state autonomy, and pragmatic recognition of the challenges posed by cross-border crime. By focusing on facilitation rather than centralization, a National Police Agency could significantly strengthen India's law enforcement capabilities while preserving its democratic and federal character.