A peaceful protest was being carried out by a group of milk traders. The Superintendent of Police instructs the Police Officials to prevent the group from committing any type of violence. He, however, tells them to ‘teach them a lesson’, if situation warrants. A police official on duty indulges into an argument with a protestor and beats him up. When inquired about his action, he says that he was told to teach them a lesson by the Superintendent of Police. Give your comment on ethical behaviour of both the Superintendent of Police and the Police official in the light of the above-mentioned incident.

The Superintendent of Police

• The first instruction — prevent violence — is a lawful duty of public order. The second — ‘teach them a lesson’ if the situation warrants — is an unethical dual message.
• ‘Teach a lesson’ in police speech commonly means extra-legal pain. It invites the subordinate to read violence as permission, while the superior keeps deniability.
• Ethical command is clear, written where needed, and limited to lawful force under the Criminal Procedure Code and police manuals. Ambiguous oral threat is a failure of leadership.
• The SP owed the traders a duty of equal protection. A peaceful dharna is not an enemy unit. Mixing prevention with punishment-by-humiliation violates Article 21 and the spirit of Article 19.
• After the beating, ethics required a prompt inquiry, medical aid, and a speaking order — not hiding behind the phrase ‘if situation warrants’.

The police official on duty

• Argument followed by beating a protester is personal anger in uniform, not crowd control. It is assault, and it treats the citizen as a body to be corrected.
• Superior orders are not a moral or legal shield for an illegal blow. Each officer remains a moral agent and a servant of the law, not of a wink.
• If violence had truly begun, the official still had graded, recorded force and arrest — not a lesson taught in a quarrel.
• Honesty after the act would have been a true report. Blaming the SP while owning the fist is cowardice dressed as obedience.

Joint failure

• The SP created a climate of condoned cruelty; the official converted it into a bruise. Both broke the trust that police power is public, not private revenge.
• Remedy is independent inquiry, departmental action, and a standing rule that oral ‘lesson’ talk is itself misconduct.