Context: 

The Supreme Court of India agreed to hear pleas in May 2025 regarding the implementation of its 2006 verdict on police reforms.

Key Highlights of Orders

• Concerns Over Non-Compliance: The Court also expressed concerns about non-compliance by various state governments in following the guidelines set out in the 2006 verdict, particularly regarding the appointment of DGPs. 
• Directions on DGP Appointments: The Supreme Court issued directions prohibiting ad hoc or interim appointments to the position of Director General of Police (DGP) by state governments.

Court’s Guidelines for DGP Appointment:

• The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), in consultation with the state government and other stakeholders, will prepare a list of three senior police officers.
• The state government will then appoint one of these officers as the DGP

Contempt Petition Against Jharkhand Government: In response to allegations, the Bench then directed that a contempt plea be served on the Jharkhand government and listed all pleas for hearing in the week commencing May 5.

The Seven Directives of the Supreme Court (Prakash Singh and N K Singh Case, 2006) to Improve Police Accountability and Performance

Directive 1: Separation of Investigation and Law & Order Functions: 

• The court recommended separating police functions related to law and order (an executive function) and criminal investigation (a part of the criminal justice system).

Directive 2: Appointment of DGP: 

• Ensure that the DGP is appointed through a transparent process and secure a minimum tenure of two years

Directive 3: Minimum Tenure for Police Officers:

• Ensure that other police officers on operational duties (including Superintendents of Police in-charge of a district and Station House Officers in-charge of a police station) are also provided a minimum tenure of two years.

Directive 3: State Security Commission (SSC): 

• Ensure that the state government does not exercise unwarranted influence or pressure on the police 
• Lay down broad policy guidelines and 
• Evaluate the performance of the state police

Directive 5: Police Establishment Boards: 

• The court also mandated the establishment of a Police Establishment Board for handling transfers, promotions, postings, and other service-related matters for police officers below the rank of DSP.

• Set up a complaint’s authority at both the state and district levels.
• To investigate complaints against officers of and above the rank of SP in cases of serious misconduct, including custodial death, grievous hurt or rape in police custody.

Directive 7: National Security Commission: 

• To ensure the selection and tenure of Central Police Organisation chiefs and other top police officers at the Union level with a minimum tenure of two years.

Significance of the case: 

• This case highlights ongoing efforts to reform India's police system and ensure accountability, transparency, and independence from political influence. 
• The successful implementation of these reforms is seen as a critical and much-needed reform to improve governance and strengthen the rule of law in India.