Was it necessary to provide police protection to Salman Khan?

This is the story of a young lad from rural Maharashtra who joined the Mumbai city police as a constable and was trained to prevent and detect crime and criminals. But instead of core policing work, he was assigned as a bodyguard to Salman Khan, the popular and rather flamboyant actor. The constable was with Salman in his car when it ran over and killed a pavement dweller. He recounted the episode to the station house officer, who then proceeded to register an offence of causing death by rash and negligent driving against Salman Khan.
 
Having served as Salman’s bodyguard for long, the young constable was torn between the call of duty and his commitment to the actor. There were two powerful pressures – one of departmental superiors who warned him to adhere to the truth and on the other side, of a wayward though lovable young actor who had admitted him into his inner circle.
 
Though this is not an article about the judiciary, I have to begin with it. The public perception of the judiciary had recently improved considerably after the conviction verdicts handed down to Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa and the actor Salman Khan. But it took a downward turn when the High Courts of Karnataka and Mumbai gave these two accused the relief they sought. People had begun believing that nobody, however high he or she was, could escape the long arm of the law. But now, they have again begun doubting the veracity of this adage. 
 
A few months in jail would have sent a very strong message to the political class (in the case of Jayalalithaa) and those blessed with money and fame (in the case of Salman Khan), that the law in India does apply to everyone. In both these cases, the lower judiciary, which is often disparagingly spoken of, had risen to the occasion and defied the popular myth. In these cases, it is the senior judges on whom people have so much faith, that appear to have been a let down. In Salman Khan’s case for instance, it is widely reported that the High Court sat well beyond the hours at which the court rises, to dispose of his application for relief!
 
But it is not about Salman Khan’s drunken driving case but police constable Ravindra Patil that I wish to focus on. He was specially trained as a police commando, but instead of being used as such, he was sent for protection duty to the actor and remained with him for a sufficiently long time so as to attain a degree of familiarity with him. Patil’s colleagues in the force recount tales of how the actor would send the policeman on errands like purchasing clothes and booze and how the policeman also got his share of natty wear and the finest Scotch! He reportedly shared the Scotch with his friends in the bachelors’ quarters in Naigaum police lines where he resided.
 
Was it necessary to provide police protection to Salman? Besides actors and leading sportsmen, there are also businessmen who have applied for police protection and received it! I do not know what criterion is applied in such cases except political patronage, which has been the common denominator in all such decisions. Even a known criminal, recently arrested by the Enforcement Directorate for big scale IPL cricket betting, had been flaunting police guards while carrying out his nefarious activities! That was a worst case scenario but even the other cases offer no justification.
 
Should policemen be separated from their core responsibilities for which they are trained, and instead be sent for protection duty of individuals who can easily afford professional bodyguards? Professional bodyguards are provided by agencies who charge a bomb for their services. The police department also levies a charge for private protection but the sum is insignificant. Private guards are better trained, more alert and physically superior, whereas policemen are trained to prevent crime and trace culprits.
 
Why should cricketers, actors, businessmen and other private individuals get trained policemen as personal bodyguards when we are always complaining of shortages? Why would the force deplete its numbers further with jobs that they are not supposed to do and are not properly trained to do? Which other country provides policemen to private individuals? Certainly not the advanced countries. Actors, sportsmen and big industrialists have their own personal security sourced from private agencies that supply such bodyguards. India should do likewise. 
 
If it is felt that such guards need to be armed because the level of threat is particularly high, then the government can consider supplying trained guards from its not-strictly-police organisations like the home guards or the State’s industrial security force. In such cases, there is an official stamp to the deployment which will enable the guards to carry arms after they are trained to use them.
 
Ravindra Patil met a sad end as a shell of a man. He had been spoilt silly by the actor and was obviously in clover because of this connection. Yet, when he died, he weighed only 30 kgs as reported in newspapers. What has not been reported is that his lifestyle at one point of time surpassed that of his colleagues by miles. He himself lacked the capacity to understand and live that type of lifestyle. This is something that could happen to other simple constables assigned to businessmen or other rich industrialists who use these men for personal errands and then proceed to pamper them with forms of luxury that they are not accustomed to.
 
This type of conflict will arise whenever less fortunate men are asked to guard the lives of the rich and famous at the cost of their own life. Policemen should not be sent for such duties. It is not their job to guard individuals. It is their job to secure the lives and property of all men and women, big or small.

The author is the former commissioner of police, Mumbai and ex-DGP, Punjab