SC clarifies rules for DGP appointments: Follow state law or court guidelines

The Supreme Court of India on Thursday clarified that states with a specific law governing the appointment of Directors General of Police (DGPs) must follow that legislation, while those without such a law must adhere to the guidelines laid down in the landmark Prakash Singh vs Union of India case on police reforms.

A bench headed by Surya Kant , along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi , made the observation while closing contempt proceedings against Bihar , Andhra Pradesh , and Telangana after noting that the states had already sent proposals to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) seeking recommendations for the appointment of their police chiefs.

The bench clarified that where a valid state law exists , the appointment must be made according to that statute. However, in states where such legislation has not been enacted, the procedure laid down by the Supreme Court in the Prakash Singh judgment (2006) will continue to apply.

Under this system, states are required to send a list of eligible senior IPS officers to the UPSC. The commission evaluates their service records and prepares a panel of three suitable candidates , from which the state government appoints one as the Director General of Police . The court had also directed that the selected DGP should normally be given a minimum fixed tenure of two years to ensure stability and continuity in police leadership.

During the hearing, it was pointed out that states such as Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh have enacted their own laws governing the appointment of DGPs. Counsel for Jharkhand informed the court that under its law, the selection of the police chief is carried out by a committee headed by a retired High Court judge .

The issue traces back to the landmark petition filed by former police officer Prakash Singh , which led the Supreme Court in 2006 to order a series of structural police reforms aimed a t reducing political interference and strengthening professional autonomy in policing. One of the key directions was the creation of a transparent process for appointing DGPs through a UPSC-empanelled list and guaranteeing them a fixed tenure.

The court also expressed concern over delays by several states in sending proposals for regular DGP appointments, noting that some governments continue with acting police chiefs instead of making permanent appointments. It has sought responses from the governments of Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand within two weeks regarding the status of their DGP appointments.