002-Evolution+of+the+CID+in+Colonial+India+and+its+Induction+in+Sind
Evolution of the CID in Colonial India
Overview
An examination of the establishment of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) in colonial India.
Discusses the report of the Indian Police Commission (1902-03) and the genesis of the CID.
Addresses the establishment of the federal CID and the Intelligence Bureau along with the induction of modus operandi techniques in investigations.
Historical Context
Background Information: John Court Curry cites that by the 1930s, the CID in India was a recent establishment compared to England.
Pre-CID Situation in England: Prior to 1829, detectives like the Bow Street runners lacked organizational structure to address crime holistically.
Formation of CID: Established as a response to the chaotic criminal environment; developed scientific systems for crime analysis by 1878.
Indian Police Commission Report (1902-03)
Identified lack of centralized crime fighting in India compared to Europe.
Recommended the establishment of provincial CID to assist local forces.
Suggested supervision by a Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIGP) and a role in collating intelligence on significant criminal activities.
Establishment of Provincial CIDs
Initial Developments: The CID was organized based on recommendations from the 1902-03 Commission.
Noteworthy Establishments: CID was established in Bombay (1910) and Calcutta (1912).
Role of the DIGP: Tasked with serious crime investigations and coordination of intelligence among provincial CIDs.
Establishment of Federal CID (Intelligence Bureau)
Commission Recommendations: Proposed a federal CID to manage intelligence at a national level for organized crime.
Functions: Information collation and contribution from provincial departments.
The central intelligence system proved critical during the years leading to independence.
Modus Operandi Techniques
Development in CID: Emphasis on an organized approach to studying crime patterns.
Major Atcherley's Contribution: Introduction of a system to classify and index information about criminals, enhancing investigation efficiency.
Gaps Between England and Colonial India
Despite the advanced setup in England since 1878, India adopted these scientific methods gradually after 1905.
Completion of CID installations varied across provinces; Sind lacked a CID until 1914.
CID in Sind: Historical Developments
Initial Challenges
The last province to adopt CID recommendations; initial setup began in late 1913.
Growth and Utility: Faced increased workload post-establishment; responsibilities expanded as operations ramped up.
John Court Curry's Reorganization (1917)
Assessment: Evaluated as a response to operational challenges and organizational duplication within Sind.
Proposed reassignment and enhancement of CID roles, emphasizing expertise and efficiency in operations.
Rao Sahib Narindas and Significant Cases (1927)
Notable Investigations: Engaged in complex cases, including counterfeiting operations linked to international crime networks.
Collaborated extensively with British authorities in England to tackle crime syndicates.
CID’s Detection of Bomb Explosions in the 1940s
Notable Incidents
Investigated various bomb incidents, highlighting the CID's role in countering subversion during this period.
Prominent Cases: Included bombings in significant public areas, often connected to political unrest.
Challenges Faced by CID in Sind
Organizational Issues
Insufficient manpower and resources hampered effective operations in key districts like Hyderabad and Tharparkar.
Complicated by overlapping responsibilities among various CID operational bodies in Karachi.
Operational Inefficacies during Hur Insurgency (1942-43)
Inadequate Intelligence Gathering: Encountered difficulties in obtaining actionable intelligence against Hur gangs.
Criticism over the performance of CID in light of rising insurgent activities and public fear.
Summary of CID Operations and Impact
The operational performance of the CID varied significantly; while it achieved some successes, systemic issues persisted.
Reorganization recommendations focused on improving inter-departmental communication and public cooperation for better efficiency in crime management.