On September 7, 2026, Union Home Minister Amit Shah presented the President’s Colour to the Goa Police, honouring eight decades of service by the force, including its role in coastal security and protecting Goa’s vital tourism economy.
The President’s Colour is among the highest honours bestowed upon a police force. It represents service, discipline, professionalism, courage and commitment to duty.
Which is precisely why what happened barely a day later at Chinchinim raises some uncomfortable questions.
The assault on Chinchinim sarpanch Gerson Gomes, allegedly by villager Malcolm Pereira, is undoubtedly condemnable. No individual has the right to take the law into his own hands. An assault on an elected representative deserves the full attention of the law.
But the subsequent handling of the case by the Cuncolim police has left many asking whether it was befitting of a force that had just received the President’s Colour.
The assault reportedly took place in the afternoon, yet the FIR was registered only around midnight. The explanation was that the police had not received a complaint from the victim, who was hospitalised, or from the panchayat secretary, panch members or staff.
But does the police’s responsibility to act depend entirely on someone walking into the station with a complaint? The police have the power to take cognisance of a cognizable offence and initiate proceedings. Given the seriousness of the incident and the video evidence reportedly circulating, the delay was bound to raise questions.
Then came the hospital episode.
As demands for Pereira’s arrest grew, he reportedly admitted himself to a private hospital. Police personnel were posted there to detain him upon discharge. Yet, according to reports, he managed to escape under their watch.
That raises a very simple question: How does an accused person, whom police are reportedly waiting to detain, simply disappear?
Who was responsible for the deployment? Were the officers questioned? Was there a procedural lapse? Were the hospital authorities asked to explain how the accused was discharged? And, most importantly, has anyone been held accountable?
These are not merely political questions. They are questions of basic policing.
An honour carries responsibility
The President’s Colour is awarded to the force as an institution. It is therefore unfair to judge thousands of dedicated police personnel by the alleged failures of one station or a handful of officers.
But institutional recognition also brings institutional accountability.
Had this incident occurred at another time, it might have been dismissed as an unfortunate police lapse. Coming just a day after the Goa Police received one of the country's highest honours, the contrast is difficult to ignore.
An award is not simply a ceremonial flag to be displayed. It represents a standard the force is expected to uphold.
If there was a lapse, the police leadership must identify it. If personnel failed in their duty, action must follow. And if there was no failure, the public deserves to know how the accused managed to evade the police.
Questions have also been raised about possible political influence. That is a serious allegation and should not be treated as fact without evidence. But when delays and apparent procedural failures occur in a politically sensitive case, suspicion is inevitable. Transparency is the only credible answer.
The courts will decide the legal fate of the accused. He is entitled to due process and must be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
But the police must still answer for their own conduct.
Eventually, public attention will fade. The hearings will continue, the headlines will disappear and life will return to normal.
But one question may linger:
Did the Goa Police, in their handling of the Chinchinim assault, live up to the standards symbolised by the President’s Colour?
The President’s Colour is an honour.
The President’s Colour should not merely be something displayed on ceremonial occasions.
It should represent a standard.
A standard of discipline.
A standard of integrity.
A standard of courage.
A standard of accountability.
Living up to it is a responsibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment