1Evolution: The Police force in the Kanniyakumari district was first organised by Dewan Ummini Thampi in 1809 and it was known as the ‘Kavel’ which means ‘‘Protection’’ in Tamil. Its efficiency and discipline cannot be spoken of very high. The police force was so small, only 200 in number, that it was incapable of carrying out its duties in the best interest of the people. Colonel Munro who succeeded Ummini Thampi as the Dewan of Travancore found the police force in a very unsatisfactory state and wanted to reorganise this set up on a sound basis, so that good Government might be ensured.

Towards this end in view, he introduced reforms to strengthen the police force. He deprived the Karyakars and the village officials of their police powers. This in itself was a revolutionary move for the Karyakars, who according to the original system obtaining in the Travancore State, wielded great influence and authority as a result of their police power and power to collect revenues for the State.

A comprehensive attempt to refer the police organisation was made in 1834, when the first Regulation Act was passed to the same effect. In 1854-55, new revenue divisions were formed and the present Kanniyakumari district was then included in the revenue division of 3admanabhapuram under the control of a Peishkar. The Peishkar exercised power of general control and supervision in all matters like avenue, magisterial and police subject to the orders of the Dewan who fas the head of the Administration and Chief Magistrate, he acted as the ‘ivisional Superintendent of Police.6 The Tahsildar was the highest police jthority in the taluk and was under the general supervision of thepeishkar.7 The police force consisted of some police officers like Cotwalls, police Naiks, Amindars, Mudappars, etc.

The Combination of both executive and magisterial powers in the hands of the one person presented a serious drawback in carrying out the executive duties of the police and the impartial administration of criminal justice. Until 1860, the police administration was directly under the Magistracy and formed part of their official staff. Each Taluk Magistrate had under him one Police Naik, from one to four Moodapars and a number of peons varying in proportion to the importance of the taluk.

Besides these, there were officials employed in districts who were known as Extra Police Officers. Each of these had range comprising two or three Taluks and was assisted by staff of Naiks, Moodapars and Peons.

These officials were under the immediate orders of the Division Peishkars or District Magistrates. They were expected to proceed to the scene of every grave crime and investigate the same. The salaries paid were 10 Sircar rupees for a Naik, Rs. 5/- for a Moodapar and Rs. 4 ^ for a peon. Extra Police Officers drew from Rs. 30/- to Rs. 65/-.

His Highness, the late Maharaja placed the reorganisation of the police system and entrusted Dewan Ramaengar with the task of drawing up a scheme for carrying out this design. Accordingly, in 1881, Dewan Ramaengar took the initiative for the reorganisation of the police administrative set up and submitted a report to the Maharaja of Travancore in which he advocated the separation of police from the Magistracy,” so as to leave the latter with an unbiased mind, in disposing of cases and secondly to improve the personnel of the Force.” He also insisted on the enforcement of educational qualifications for the police personnel and attractive salaries for the posts. He also stressed the necessity of giving systematic training to the new recruits. A regulation based on the recommendations of Dewan Ramaengar and on the provisions of the Madras Police Act, was passed in 1881. The reorganisation was completed by 1882. In 1882, there was one policeman to every 4.8 sq. miles of the country and to every 12,724 of the population.

The year 1919 saw further reforms in the police organisation. The police in the Kanniyakumari district was placed under the general control and jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Police, who was the head of thepolice administration in Travancore State. The control of the Police vvithj the district was vested in the District Superintendent of Pollen who w assisted by an Asst-District Superintendent. The district polict officjg were under the direct control of the District Magistrate.

Further reform of the Police Department was taken up in 1938. Th§ Head of the Department was designated as Inspector General of Policy instead of Commissioner of Police. The District Superintendent was put in charge of maintaining Law and Order in Kanniyakumari district and to effectively conduct the police administration within the area.

In 1956, the reorganisation was effected which brought the areas in the present Kanniyakumari district to Tamil Nadu, from the erstwhile Travancore-Cochin- State. Hence, the pattern of police force and other administrative matters had to naturally take recourse to the Tamil Nadu pattern.

Organisation of Police Force at present, in the District: At present, the administration of the police in the district is under the immediate control of the District Superintendent of Police, who is under the general control of the District Collector. The Superintendent of Police is assisted by one Additional Superintendent of Police and Deputy Superintendent of Police. Both are solely incharge of prohibition squad. Besides, there are five Deputy Superintendents of Police, of which three for Sub-divisions, one for the District Crime Records Branch, and the Protection of Civil Rights and the last for the Armed Reserve Force.

Tamil Nadu is divided into seven ranges and 25 police districts, of which Kanniyakumari district is included in the Tirunelveli Range under the control of the Deputy Inspector General of Police.

The three sub-divisions are at Nagercoil, Thuckalay and Colachel which ^re placed under the supervision and control of three Deputy Superintendents of Police. The Nagercoil sub-division has two circles i.e. Nagercoil and Kanniyakumari and 10 police stations. The Thuckalay Sub-division functions with quite identical number of circles namely Thuckalay and Vilavancode and seven police stations. The Coiach sub-division has two circles viz., Colachel and Eraniel with eight Police stations, Apart from these police stations, each sub-division has its own out-posts and traffic wings.

Two police stations, exclusively with women police officials to deal with women criminals are also functioning in the district one at Kottar and the other at Kanniyakumari.The details of the Police Stations, Out-posts and Traffic Police stations and the strength of the Police Force in the district are furnished in the table below.

Kuzhithurai (P.S)

Kuzhithurai (Traffic)

Thiruvattar (P.S.)

Arumanai (P.S.)

Kadayalumodu (O.P.)

Kaliyakkavilai (P.S.)

Palugal (O.P.)

Colachel (P.S)

Colachel (Traffic)

Kottencode (P.S.)

Puthukadai (P.S.)

Nithiravilai (P.S.)

Karingal (P.S.)

Eraniel (P.S.)

Eraniel (Traffic)

Manavalakurichi (P.S.)

Rajakkamangalam (P.S.)

Lower Kodayar (P.S.)

District Crime Branch -Ozhukinasery

Protection of Civil Rights Wing, Ozhukinasery

District Special Branch, Nagercoil Armed Reserve-Nagercoil.During 1965 the strength of tho pollco In tho district was 810 inclusive of both. officers and constabulary,11 with the explosion of population, urbanisation and vast improvements In thoA/urlous fields, it had become necc^sary to increase the strength of the pollco, As against the strength of 810 in 1965, the number increased gradually in the various branches of the police and has reached a strength of 1670 In 1988. According to 1981 census the population of the district was 14,23,399. Hence, compared to the strength of police in 1981, the ratio works out to one policeman for every 852 citizens.

The strength of the Police Force (categorywise) functioning in the district, is given in the table below 12

SP ADSP DSP Ins. Sis HCs Cons.
(V (2) (3) W (5) (6) (7) (8)
1 Regular Police 1 4 14 58 85 959
2 Prohibition Squad 1 1 4 6 8 89
3 Anti-corruption squad 3 3 3
4 Armed Reserve 1 1(R1) 11(RS1) 38 380
Total 1 1 6 22 75 134 1431


Law and Order Situation in Kanniyakumari District: Kanniyakumari is generally a tranquil district where the law and order problems were a few and far between. However, the beginning of this decade has witnessed a few law and order problems which were not only serious but strained the human relations and social atmosphere.

The Police Administration Reports of the years 1977 to 1986 reveal incidents which caused law and order problems in the district, Law and Order problems created by lorry drivers, auto drivers, students and some religious groups have been generally explained therein.

Incidents arising out of communal clash between two religious groups were found to be common every year since 1977. The Thengapattinam incident between Muslims and Christian fishermen in 1977, the incident al Suchindram between Harijans and other caste Hindus also in 1977, theHindu-Muslim clash in Kaliakkavilai in 1978 and another Hindu-Muslim clash in Thuckalay in 1979 are a few that need mention.

While a fisherman, (Christian) of Ramanthurai was fishing at Thengapattinam on 20 April 1977, a Muslim demanded fish, free of cost, which the fisherman refused.13 Hence, when the former came to the shop of a Muslim along with his friend the next day, the Muslims waylaid and picked up a quarrel and stabbed the fishermen. On hearing this, about 300 fishermen gathered and attacked about 300 Muslims gathered there. As a result two fishermen and five Muslims got simple injuries. Police brought the situation under control and after the formation of Peace Committee, normalcy was restored.

In the Suchindium incident, the clash occurred between Harijans on one side, Nadars, Vellalar and Thevars on the other on 16 August 1977. It all started when the caste Hindus questioned the Harijans when the latter took a funeral procession through the Panchayat Street ignoring the usual path. The altercation resulted in a clash causing injuries to either side. The police brought the situation under control.

The 1978 communal clash at Kaliakkavilai occurred between fishermen and Muslims, when the former formed their own ‘Fishermen Sangam’, as they were dissatisfied with the one dominated by the Muslims and started auctioning fish at Kaliakkavilai, on 4th August 1978. As this was objected to by the Muslims, a wordy duel started developed into an attack in which the Muslims assaulted the fishermen. When the fishermen brought fish in a lorry for auctioning at Kaliakkavilai, one was stabbed and another got injured. On the night of 4th August 1978, a Peace Committee Meeting was convened with the representatives of Muslims and fishermen and both the parties agreed to maintain peace.

The 1979 incident in Thuckalay between the Muslims and Hindus of Vettikonam village erupted dn a dispute over the usage of a pathway through Palli street inhabited by Muslims.15 While the Muslims claimed that the street was their private property, the Hindus claimed it to be a poramboke land. The Muslims did not allow the Ayyappa devotees to pass through the street. This resulted in a clash between the Muslims and Hindus on 12 January 1979. A peace committee meeting was held in the presence of the District Collector and Superintendent of Police, Kanniyakumari with the representatives of both the groups, and it was settled by making Palli Street as a pucca thoroughfare for the use of the people. There was no further incident.The year 1982 was one of the eventful and problamatic years for the police as well as Revenue administration as the law and order situtation in that year became worse and the tranquility had suffered to a greater BXtent. The cause for the concern was the Mondaikadu incident in 1982, when a major law and order problem arose between Hindus and Christian fishermen.

This district is noted for its high percentage of literacy and religious harmony, social amity and harmony among the people of this area are the realistic features. Though there were communal clashes between fishermen and Nadars, fishermen and Muslims, Nadars and Krishnavagai community, etc., there were no large scale religious clashes involving Hindus and Christians as a whole, till October in the year 1981.

By the end of 1981, there were frequent clashes between Hindus and Christians in the district. A few stray incidents which first started in Thuckalay and Kulasekaram on the Christmas Eve, subsequently spread over the coastal villages.

In March 1982, there was a major incident at Mondaikadupudur, a coastal village, in which six fishermen died due to police firing, 40 persons including 25 police personnel sustained injuries, conseqent on the religious clash between the Christian fishermen and Hindus at the time of Mondaikadu temple festival.

Mondaikadu is situated in Manavalakurichi village of Kalkulam taluk and this temple which is on the sea shore, is at a distance of three <ilometres east of Colachel and 16 km. west of Nagercoil17 and is said to De dated back to the 7th century B.C.18 Until the merger of the area with Madras State in 1956, this temple was under the control of Trivandrum Devasvam. After 1956, this is being maintained by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department of the Government of Tamil ^adu, dedicated to the Goddess Bhagavathi Amman, who is considered to 3e very famous and powerful deity of this area. The deity is believed to be n the form of ant hill about 12 feet in height, which people believe grows Jay by day.19 The ‘Amman’ is feared to be very powerful.

Hindus used to gather in large numbers from far and near places, especially from the adjacent Kerala State at the time of annual festival <nown as ‘Mondaikkadu kodai’ which takes place in the Tamil month of Masi’ i.e March every year and is celebrated for 10 days.


Till the end of 1982, the festival was celebrated peacefully and without any problem. However, these long years have developed a strained feeling between the Christians and Hindus of this district. As a result, the Christians of Mondaikadupudur resented the Hindus, while passing through their village, to have their usual holy dip in the sea. The menace of the loudspeakers around the temple, at the time of the festival and their supposed offensive references to Christianity strengthened the ill feeling and widened the gap between these two religious groups. This was an added cause for the resentment of the fishermen, who illuminated a shrine situated on the path leading to the beach and started playing records. Under instructions from the Collector of Kanniyakumari, the Sub-Collector, Padmanabhapuram held talks between both the groups and persuaded them and brought out a calm atmosphere. Thus, their problematic and offensive activities were put an end to.

The Police Administration report goes to show that on 1 March 1982about 2000 to            3000 strong Christian            fishermen        started ransacking theshops, attacking the Hindus, molesting Hindu            women            devotees, andattacking the police. In the scuffle, 25 policemen were injured. As a lastresort, the police opened fire which resulted in the death of six fishermenand injuries to        15 fishermen. Later     on, there          was a          heavy funeralprocession from Colachel to Mondaikadupudur. Infuriated by this firing, thefishermen started indulging in violent activites, alleging that the firing andother actions of police were due to influence and false allegations of RSSagainst the fishermen. Since their devotees were not allowed to take theirholy dip in the sea, the Hindus got aggravated and indulged in violentactivities. Thus rose a major religious problem and this was the cause forseveral subsequent clashes and incidents that occurred in Kanniyakumaridistrict in 1982. Following this incident, there were series of incidents oflawlessness involving heavy damages to properties and also to humanlives.

Again, there was a police firing at Melamanakudy, a coastal village on the night of 15 March, 1982 in which two fishermen were killed. A group of Hindu extremists damaged the houses of fishermen, looted household articles, fishing nets, etc. and smashed the entire village Pallam by setting fire and the damage was estimated to be more than Rs.30 lakh. There was, however, no loss of human life in this incident. In another clash occurred in April 1982 between Hindus and Christians at Colachel (Kalimar Bridge), the mob refused to disperse and were menacinglyadvancing, despite goadings and several warnings by police. As a last resort, the police opened fire and thereafter, the entire mob dispersed.

In between March and December 1982, about 50 clashes involving different groups of people had occurred, resulting in damages to properties and bodily injuries. Though these sporadic incidents caused much concern to the authorities no serious clashes were witnessed nor was major lawlessness or mob violence occurred in March 1982.

At the instance of the Collector and Superintendent of Police of Kanniyakumari, series of Peace Committees held in April and May 1982 strengthened peace.eased tension, and paved the way for permanent peace in the district.

Under the instructions from the Collector and Superintendent of Police, Kanniyakumari, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thuckalay and Sub-Collector, Padmanabhapuram held Peace Commitee on 3 Januaryat Thuckalay. The Christians and Hindus assured to keep peace and there was no incidence for sometime. A district level peace committee consisting of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirunelveli Range, the Superintendent of Police, Kanniyakumari district and the Collector of Kanniyakumari district, was held on 18 January 1982 which was attended by leaders from all religious and political parties. An all party religious procession was taken out on 30 January 1982 at Kulasekaram, headed by the Collector and the Superintendent of Police, Kanniyakumari district, following a decision taken in the above peace Committee meeting. The religious and political leaders appealed the public to keep peace, abjuring violence.

Another district level Peace Committee Meeting after Mondaikadu Police firing was held on 6 March 1982 at Collectorate, Nagercoil under the Chairmanship of Collector, Kanniyakumari district and the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirunelveli Range and the Superintendent of Police, Kanniyakumari district also participated, besides other non-officials. Subsequent Peace Committee Meetings were held on 10 April 1982, 2 May 1982, 3 May 1982, 10 May 1982, 23 May 1982 and 30 May 1982 at Eathamozhy, Ammandivilai, Colachel, Kanniyakumari, Melakrishnanpudur, Mondaikadu and Thuthoor respectively.22 The series of Peace Committees held during April and May 1982 strengthened the peace in the district.


As per the Administration Report of the Superintendent of Police Kanniyakumari district, the district was free from major violent communal clashes during the year 1983, as also free from communal tension between the Hindus and Christians when compared with the year 1982, The Hindu Munnani had planned to conduct the Second Hindu Resurgence Conference at Nagercoil on 13 February 1983 but this was banned. As prohibitory orders were violated and a large crowd indulged in violence, despite warnings by police, the police as a last resort, opened fire, resulting in death of one person. Subsequently, the conference was held at Nagercoil on 11 September 1983 with adequate police protection. The annual festival of Bhagavathi Amman temple, Mondaikadu, was held from 27 February 1983 to 8 March 1983, without any untoward incidents. Generally, law and order situation was well under control and peaceful during the year 1983.23

Kanniyakumari district was free from major and violent communal or political clashes during the year 1984, so also free from communal tension except a few stray incidents.24 During July and August 1984, there were incidents of assault by the members of Hindu Front, protesting against attack on the State Organiser. There were incidents of assault between the members of Nadar Mahajana Sangam and Hindu Front and prompt action was taken by Police and Revenue Officials then and there firmly and further representations averted.The district was free from any major and violent political clashes,25during the year 1985. However, there were outbreaks of breach of peace, due to communal incidents at Kollencode, which resulted in Police firing causing two deaths and injuries to four persons and the incidents at Eathamozhi, Pannimalai (Kondakattimalai) and Perinchakonam which were settled then and there by stern action by Police and Revenue officials under the leadership of the then collector of Kanniyakumari and the tension was in no way allowed to escalate.

Police firing and connected incidents in 1985: Kollencode Police Station in Colachel Subdivision is the bordering station to Kerala. Jurisdiction includes three coastal villages of Nerodithurai; Marthandanthurai Vallavilaithurai inhabited by Roman Catholic fishermen with a population about 8 to 10,000. Two other villages are inhabited by Hindu Nairs, Christian Nadars, and small population of Muslims and Hindu Arayas who are fishermen by community live in the areas adjacent to coastal villages. There are 200 families of about 1,000 populations ofArayas. The coastal villaga of Poihlyoor inhnbitod by MC Flshftrmen ii the next adjoining village in Kniala with a population of about 30,000,On 8 August 1988 a clash hotween Hindus and Christian fishermen occurred in Pinkulnm, following a wordy quarrel and exchange of blows, between a Hindu front member and a Christian. to this, on 19th August 1985, about 1000 strong such mob of Christian fishemen set fir© to the houses of Hindus and about 200 of them armed with deadly weapons gathered at Vallaisalai village for a show down with the Hindus, The Police who entered to avert major clash were attacked by irate fishermen causing injuries to four police personnel. As the situation went out of control police opened fire in self defence and two fishermen died and another two were injured.

On 21 August 1985, a peace committee was field by the Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of Police at Kuzhithurai, The M.L.As of Vilavancode and Padmanabhapuram and Parish Priest of concerned coastal villages, representatives from Hindus, Arayas, Muslims and Christians attended the peace committee meeting. D.S.P., Colachel and R.D.O., Padmanabhapuram also participated.It was resolved to live in peace by maintaining communal was also decided to send a team with Deputy Superintendent of Police, Colachel, Revenue Divisional officer, manabhapuram, 2 M.L.As and the Parish Priests to rehabilitate the affected people on both sides on the next day morning. Accordingly, they went on 22 August 1985 and attended the rehabilitation and relief measures,

In the year 1986 also, the district was free from any major and violent communal or political clashes. There occurred only a very few minor clashes which were prevented from developing into major ones by the timely intervention and stern action of the police and the then Collector of Kanniyakumari.

As regards prohibition, violation of prohibition laws is a common feature in the district. The existence of hilly tracts and inaccessibility of the region make it rather difficult for the police to enforce the law effectively. The statistical data pertaining to the common crimes for the past 20 years given in Tables 1 to 3 below would reveal the state of affairs with regard to crimes in the district.


Properites Lost and Recovered by the Police in Kanniyakumari District

Year Property lost Propertyrecovered Percentage of recovery
1979 374595 148094 39.5
1980 635809 173813 27.3
1981 1024344 428619 41.8
1982 901606 460084
  1. 3
1983 1896420 1000044 52.0
1984 1867068 712968 38.2 
1985 806836 393426 48.8
1986 948841 535844 56.5
1987 993158 359438 36.2

Report from the Director General of Police, Madras, dated 20 December 1988.



Table 1 relating to grave crimes shows that the number of murder has increased from 19 in 1969 to 56 in 1987. Dacoity is almost nil and robbery albeit on the increase and static at 10 for 1984, 1985 and 1986, is comparatively negligible. It has lessened in subsequent years, House breaking and theft are the two common offences and are large in number, but with varying trend.

From table 2, it is apparent that offenders are found more in class II

e., serious offences against person and Class III i.e. serious offences against person and property. The numbers of such offences are found to be increasing every year, as the number of class II offence which was 220 in 1970, had risen to 775 in 1980 and 1053 in 1986. Similarly, serious offences against person and property or property alone have increased from 131 in 1970 to 264 in 1980 and 299 in 1986. The largest number of offences committed under this class is 499 in 1983. The number of minor offences against property is also on the increase, though the number of offences relating to other categories is comparatively lesser. Thus increasing trend from year to year in almost all classes of offences is noticeable.


Table 3 reveals an increase in pfooertw^ be very high during 1983 and 1984 offences against property. But about number ofcould be recoveredthe development in the field ot Science and Technology and thegrowing use of computer have helped to modernise management systemsall over the world. Tamil Nadu Police has fully availed of these systemsand has introduced new techniques in areas, involving crime statistics and crime detection.With a view to exploit the proper and optimum use of scientific techniques in the crime prevention strategies and other allied police duties, the police computer wing was formed in the State in 1971 under the Central scheme of Modernisation of Police Forces.

Any classified police data can be transmitted to police officials over great distances for identifying fingerprints and other related information at short notice, now. In Kanniyakumari district, the police computer wing receives input forms in all property cases, advisory memos from police computer wing, Madras and online enquires. These advisory memos received from computer wing are often usefui to the investigating officials to unearth considerable number of property cases.

Finger Print Bureau: The scientific tools of investigation are of great value to resolve crime requiring such application nowadays. Considering the intricacy of the mode of operation of the present day criminals, the Government have been continuously exploring all avenues to introduce innovative resources to combat the issue. One such measure is the establishment of Finger Print Bureau in the State and the single digit print sections in all the police districts. The single digit finger print. Kanniyakumari district is a special unit functioning under the direct control of the Superintendent of Police, Kanniyakumari. This Bureau has started functioning from 16 June 1972 with one Superintendent, three Finger Print Experts and three Finger Print Searchers.

This Bureau renders help to the investigating officers in the detection of crimes. The experts manning these sections visit the scenes of crime reported in the district, under house thefts, house breakings, decoity. robbery, murder and automobile theft cases. They process the finger impressions in the scenes of crime, lift them and refer to the single digit.

The cases which still remain undetected after processing of records of the Single Digit Sections and the Finger Print Bureau, Madras, are taken, compared and searched in the Finger Print Bureau records of the other States if tho criminal is suspected to be from those States, till they are located. It is a fact that many cases of grave nature have been detected through this method.

To achieve the best result of identification, the finger prints of potential criminals convicted under cognizable offences under section 454 or 457 to 380 IPC and 381 IPC, are taken and kept on record.

The cases regarding dacoity, robbery and murder for gain are classified under Battley System and arranged. In this connection, the Finger Print Slips of dossier criminals and habitual offenders are also recorded.

The finger prints of suspected persons arrested in various police stations of this district are sent to this bureau for onward transmission to the Finger Print Bureau, Madras, to note their antecedents. The scene of crime prints are also compared with this Finger Print slips, before they are despatched to the Finger Print Bureau, Madras. The conviction memos prepared for the convicted cases in the police stations are also sent to this bureau. They are scrutinized and forwarded to the Finger Print Bureau, Madras to assign FPB serial number.

The unidentified scene of Crime Prints from all the other districts are received by this bureau and compared with the Finger Prints of potential criminals of this District. If the criminals of this district have operated in any other districts, their identity is established through prints.The performance of this bureau since 1978 to 1987, is given in table-4.20

Many complicated cases which stand without any clue, are successfully identified by this bureau through chance prints. As Kerala is the border to Kanniyakumari district, the criminals from Kerala State are frequently operating in this district and their involvements are brought to light only by this bureau.


Special Branch: TheDistrict Special Branch is functioning atNagerocil with one inspector, three sub-inspectors, six head constables and three constables. The main duties of the staff of the special branch are to watch and collect advance intelligence regarding the activities of all political parties, trade unions, all Government employees association, communal situations and other law and order problems, and to pass on information to higher officials and Govenment as well. Apart from this the activities of the foreigners, students and extremists are also being watched and informations lurnished.

The Special Branch staff did a commendable service, during the Mondaikadu incident in 1982, by furnishing advance information to the Government and averted major incidents at Saral. Santhapuram and Kollencode villages. Due to the advance information given by the stiff, the major festivals in this district were smoothly celebrated.

Prohibition Enforcement Wing: The prohibition wing attends to the enforcement of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act 1937, and the rules made thereunder. This wing is supervised by a Deputy inspector General of Police at the state level, and by the zonal superintendent of police at the district level.

There are four units viz., Nagercoil, Thuckalay, Kuzhithurai and Arumanai functioning in Kanniyakumari district. Each unit is placed under the control of one Inspector, two sub-inspectors, two Head Constables, two grade I Police Constables and 18 Grade II constables.

The Enforcement units are shouldered with the responsibilities of stamping out illicit distillation, transport and sale of arrack and smuggling of Indian Made Foreign Liquor from neighbouring states in order to check erosion of excise revenue due to the State Exchequer. They are also required to check misuse of rectified spirit and molasses allotted to respective licence holders.

Protection of Civil Rights: This Unit is functioning in Kanniyakumari district with the staff comprising one Inspector, two Sub-inspectors, one statistical Inspector, two Head Constables and two constables since 11 September 1979. They are functioning under the control of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Records Bureau and under the direct supervision of the Superintendent of Police, Kanniyakumari district. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Protection of Civil Rights Act, sections of the society.

In Kanniyakumari district, 23 cases m 1966 and 28 cases m 1967, w&t registered by PCR Act Wtng This unit also supervises the cases of atrocities registered by the local police.

Police Control Room :            The      Nagercoil Police Control Room was

incepted on 20 April 1974 with a strength of one inspector of Police, thrs* Sub inspectors, six Grade I Police Constables and nine Greek* constables It is functioning in three shifts round the clock A section of Armed Reserve men are being kept as striking force at control room in order to attend any emergency in addition to regular strength The main functions of the Control Room is to attend emergency calls and fire calls An average of three to four calls a day are being attended to by it.

Armed Reserve:Armed Reserve Force is functioning inKanniykumari district with the strength of one Reserve Inspector 12 BN serve SubInspectors. 38 Head Constables. 10 Grade I Poles Constables and 370 Police Constables. The Main duty of this force is to maintain law and order, and to provide security to the very Important Persons.

Women Police Force Two women police stations, one Kannyakumari and the other at Kottar, are functioning, each with one voman sub Inspector, ne woman Head constable and 10 Gt^de I Wfflnm Police Constables in the district. The women Police Constables are trained like all other police constables, and their duties are of special nature. These duties are classified as

Bandobust at festivals (vide details below) where ladies are expected to assemble; 2. Arresting of women and juvenile offenders;

Checking of women offenders; 4. Escorting to and from courts of women and juvenile offenders; 5. Traffic regulation near schools; and

Accompanying raiding parties, who raid brothels.

Home Guards: This organisation functions in the district with the strength of 166 men homeguards and 56 women homeguards. The Area Commander and Deputy Area Commander are incharge of the Home Guard. The Superintendent of Police, Kanniyakumari district is the Commander of the Home Guards in the district. A Reserve sub-inspector sanctioned from the cadre strength of the district police unit, looks after the cash transactions and other official correspondence. The Home Guards attend parades, and are also deputed for traffic duties, night patrols, election duties and bandobust duties.

Leave a Reply

© 2017 My CMS · Subscribe: · Website designed by GM Software
XSLT by CarLake