The Provincial Armed Constabulary mutiny of 1973 has some valuable lessons for incumbent Governments
Almost a decade ago, Kirori Singh Bainsla, a retired lieutenant Colonel of the Indian Army, made headlines with the first ever caste-based agitation for the Gujjars. Early this year, a 10-day long agitation by Jats in Haryana, demanding to be included in the Other Backward Class (OBC) category, resulted in a spate of rioting, looting and mayhem. It also led to loss of lives. Property worth crores of rupees was damaged.
The recent episode in Mathura where the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) tried to evict unauthorised occupants of Jawahar Bagh resulted in over 30 deaths. There was a belated realisation that a systematic attempt was being made to grab 200 acres of prime Government land by a self-styled neta for the last two years!
All these incidents speak of a major weakness on part of our administrative machinery which is responsible for maintaining law and order situation viz, waiting for orders from the higher ups! While vague reasons for prolonged inactivity is duly trotted out, in a lumbering democracy such as ours, the question remains: Where does the buck stopIJ
One of the State’s primary responsibilities is to maintain law and order, but the latter has often fallen prey to populist politics, when hard choices are studiously avoided on the pretext of building a consensus on each and every issue and situation.
In an emerging scenario, when law and order is being blatantly breached by a group of self-styled activists, is the local police officer, let alone a constable, authorised and trained to take the initiative to effectively intervene or should one wait for orders from the highest authority viz, the Chief MinisterIJ
late in 1973, indiscipline had been building up in the ranks of the PAC of Uttar Pradesh with other ranks disobeying their officers’ orders and even insulting them. Higher pay, better living conditions and a host of other demands were on the cards. Soon, the seething discontent in these paramilitary forces erupted into an unprecedented mutiny of sorts.
A students’ agitation in lucknow proved to be the flash point. To make matters worse, additional PAC forces which had been brought in soon joined ranks with the students and held joint demonstrations. Kanpur, with one of the largest forces, had become the hot bed of politics and orders to call in the Army, to disarm them, were still being contemplated when the news was out.
Overnight, the PAC ranks, under their self-appointed leaders broke open the armory and took hold of not only rifles, but also light machine guns, rocket launchers, and hand grenades. Taking key positions on the top of the barracks they planned for a long siege.
The young District Magistrate of Kanpur had no time to consult the higher echelons nor did he find the need to wait for orders from the top. Instead, he took stock of the situation and immediately asked for Army assistance from the local commander as per procedure laid down.
PAC barracks were soon surrounded by the men in olive green. By five next morning, when all attempts to persuade the PAC jawans to lay their arms had failed, and approaching dawn would have made the Army combatants easy target to PAC fire, orders were given to storm the barracks.
PAC rank and file were no match to the disciplined and well-trained Army jawans and within a few hours all was over. There were similar showdowns, some brief and other prolonged at Gorakhpur, Ramnagar, Jehangirabad etc. On May 27 that year, the Uttar Pradesh Government announced that 379 PAC mutineers had been arrested and 600 were still missing, either absconding or dead!
The incident at Kanpur was duly reported by the District Magistrate to the Chief Secretary. Chief Minister Kamlapati Tripathi accepted the decision taken by the officer on the spot and simply refused to be coerced into ordering any enquiry, judicial or otherwise. This was indicative of the implicit trust which he placed in his officer’s capabilities and judgement.
Four decades later, it is rather hard to find politicians of such maturity and stature who not only knew where the ‘buck stopped’, but honoured the decision made by those charged to make it.
(The writer is a former Member, Railway Board)