The question of railway Police seems to have come into Consideration in 1862, and in 1864 the Bengal Government directed the Inspector General of Police and the consulting Engineer to submit a joint report about policing on the Railways. This was not done, however, the towards the end of 1865 the Inspector General drew up a note in which after explaining that the staff in the Railway employed under the Name of Police could not legally act as such in the absence of enlistment under the Police Act V of 1861 and after setting forth some of the abuses for which this staff was alleged to be responsible and with which he was unable to deal unable to deal owing to the exclusion of the Government Police from railway stations, he proposed that a certain number of regular Police should be deputed to every station. He recommended that these should belong to the district force under the supervision of the District Superintendent of Police, an arrangement which he preferred to the employment of special Police Force. For the protection of yards and workshops he suggested separate chowkidars under the entire control of the railway passed a resolution accepting the Lt. Governor's proposal placing a Government Police force at the disposal of condition that the entire body should be under the control of the Company only, a special officer of the rank of District Superintendent (Police) being placed in charge of it. On this condition the company was prepared to meet the whole of the cost "on consideration of the benefits likely to be derived from this system". Thereupon in June 1866 the Lt. Governor of Bengal ordered the creation of such a Police force on the lines suggested in the forgoing resolution. Its cost was to be met by the company subject to a contribution (afterwards settled at ¼ th) from the Government equal to the reduction which the establishment of the railway Police might enable Government to make in its regular district Police. At the same time into Inspector General was to continue "to exercise the same general control over the railway Police, that he exercised over all the Police enrolled under the Act".

                  However, in Central Provinces railway Police for Great Indian Peninsula Railway was prior to the establishment of a similar system on the East Indian Railway. The Nagpur branch of the G.I.P. Railway was opened in Nagpur in February 1867 and soon after Police was organised and placed at the stations on the lines within the limits of Central provinces. The force consisted of 1 inspector, 1 European constable, 99 Indian constables, exclusive of train Police guards and the whole force being under the direction and supervision of the railway Police for the whole line, who was appointed as Assistant District Superintendent of Police for the central Provinces. Exclusive the share of the pay of the Police Superintendent and his office establishment this force cost rupees 20,988 its up-keep. This whole amount was paid by the railway company. This system, however, did not work well because the railway Superintendent had to supervise the whole line from Bombay to Khandwa and Nagpur and from Bombay to Poona. This considerably curtailed his visits to the  Central Provinces and it is impossible for him to exercise any real supervision over the Police. The District Superintendent through whose districts the line passed took little interest in the railway Police, which were only nominally under their control.

                  The Government railway Police on the portion of the E.I.R in Jabalpur District were organised and posted during December 1867, but did not commence work until the beginning of 1868. With the concurrence of the Inspector General of Police in the central provinces, it was that as far as the “organization, discipline, and supervision of the force is concerned  the whole of the Government railway Police in the Jabalpur district should be under the Inspector General of Police in the north western provinces (U.P.)”. This Police was a distinct body paid and clothed by the railway company, and subordinate to their own Inspectors and Assistant Inspectors General and their sphere of action confined to railway limits. As regards reporting and investigation of crime this force is stood in the same relation to the Deputy Commissioner and the District Superintendent of Police as the Police in other districts.

                          In 1870 Inspector General of Police expressed his view that the system of railway Police obtaining a Jabalpur railway station on east India line was a anomalous one as the Police nominally Police nominal Lisa Burdick to do this dick suck it and end of Police and it was impossible for him to exercise any real control over them the spectrum dental we can do this performed his that the system of system of railway Police obtaining on the Jabalpur section of the East India Railway should terminate and the system obtaining on the G.I.P. line should be extended to the region.

                    The duties of railway Police personnel may also be outlined in passing. On the G.I.P. section one Constable was always on duty to look the protection of station Master’s office and all property line within the station boundary. Besides an order for the production of goods trains after Dark directed that a constable was to be sent to the distance signal to meet the trains as they came in with the object of seeing that no person jumped off the train as it slackened speed on the station. Another constable was to go to the other distant signal to see that no person got on the train after it had left the station. The head constable was required to examine the fastenings of the  wagons at the station itself;  so that at  small stations all the Police came on for duty for every goods train. The necessity for this arose in the fact that on the main line trains were often robbed between two stations.  The thief got on the buffers of the wagon as the train was moving slowly out of the station, managed to open the wagon and threw out part of  contents as the train was going and then jumped off it as it slackened seed on coming into the next station.  In 1871 of system of train Guards to protect wagons in transit and those standing at the station was instituted.

                      Addition were made in 1873 and the in the strength of Railway the G.I.P. section to meet the requirements of  Holkar and the Wardha Coal State Railway both of which were opened Central Provinces limits and were worked by the G.I.P. Railway Company.  

                        The main forms of crime on the railway for this period were thefts, burglary and pickpocketing. In 1871 Inspector General remarked that   “whenever a wagon in which consignment is found to be short arrives at Jabalpur, which is the terminus, and the exact place of the theft cannot be ascertained, the value is put down as stolen at Jabalpur. This arrangement may be convenient one”. He added “but it seems hardly fair that the Central Provinces should wear the burden of the sins of all the thieves who operate on the line between Howrah and Jabalpur”. Towards the end of last century the complicity of railway officials in thefts of railway property was suspected.

                            The  system of railway Police on the G.I.P. and the Bengal-Nagpur railway lines passing through the territory of Central Provinces continued unchanged  till 1907.

                       Following the unanimous opinion of the   local Governments, the Government of India accepted as the general principle the commission’s view that “ the jurisdiction of Railway Police Force should be co- terminous with the limits of the province”. As an application of this principle the Government of India decided that “the Chief Commissioner of the Central Provinces should have jurisdiction over the East India railway from Jabalpur to Katni and over the G.I.P. railway from the Jabalpur to  Bombay boundary”.  The Government of India also thought desirable that the Indian Mid-Land section of the G.I.P. from Itarsi to frontier of United provinces together with the Bhopal- Ujjain and Bina-Kotha branches, which are partly with native States, and partly with the Central Provinces should be under the chief commissioner”. The Government of India concurred with the commission and the local Governments in holding that the “primary duty of railway Police should be the preservation of law and order and that they should not be called upon to undertake the watch and ward of railway property”. The Government also desired that the “organisation of the railway Police should follow the lines recommended by the commissions for the district Police” and that “they should be under a Deputy Inspector General of Police who should also be the head of the provincial criminal investigation department”. The Government of India did not accept the recommendation made by one of the local Government that a special training school should be maintained for the railway Police. In regard to local allowances the Government of India accepted the commission’s view that the  Superintendent and assistant Superintendent should receive rupees 150 and rupees 100 respectively in addition to the pay of their rank.

                              Concurrently, the policing of railway lands in central India was transferred to the Rajputana   Administration in 1908, when it took over from the Bombay Government following acceptance of the recommendation of the Police commission of 1962-03. The Police assistant to the agent to the Governor General in rajputana (later called Resident) was placed in charge of the railway Police ,with a Superintendent of Government Railway Police at Ajmer in direct charge. The Police assistant was also the Inspector General of Police .The railway Police jurisdiction totalled nearly 1500 miles on the Broad and Meter Gauge Section of the Bombay-Baroda and central India Railway and for the Central India it traversed the states of Dewas, Dhar, Holkar, jhabua ,jaora , Ratlam and sailana, as also Gwalior. It had 4 Police Stations and 3 outposts to manage with defined jurisdictions with a total mileage of 410 and an executive staff of 160, under a Deputy Superintendent of  Railway Police  stationed at Indore .

                               The line under the jurisdiction of the Superintendent of railway Police ran to 12,701 miles. Simultaneously a railway Police manual was provisionally issued.

   G.I.P. RAILWAY                          MILES

E.I. Railway

1.                                 In 1919 the Secretary of state sanctioned the division of the railway Police charge into two districts as also an additional post of Superintendent railway Police and the change was given effect to on 1st January 1920. Alongside a Prosecuting Inspectors in each railways district was appointed. With effect from 1st April 1919 the system of apportioning the cost of railways Police was changed, Government accepting responsibility for the whole cost of the Police employed on law and order in return for an annual subsidy from the railway companies, while the railways paid the cost of the watch and ward staff.

                                  The main type of crime on the railways was thefts, from trains in transit and from goods sheds as well as from platforms and waiting rooms. In 1916 two dacoities  were reported on the Bhopal -Ujjain section of the G.I.P. In one of these out of the 5 accused 4 happened to be Sepoys of State Forces. The connivance of the railway servants and chowkidars in the crime on railways as regularly brought to the notice of the Chief Commissioner by successive Inspectors General of Police. The chief commissioner concurred with the inspectors general of Police in this matter. In 1912, 78 percent of the persons convicted of thefts on railways were railway servants. In 1913, 51 percent of the persons convicted for crime on the railways happened to be railway servants. In 1915 out of 88 percent convicted for pilferage on the railways 68 were railway servants and ‘hamals’. To illustrate the extent of this pilferage, Superintendent railway Police, in 1915 cited a particular case in which 55 tins of ghee were discovered in water holes close to the Katni station yard. Subsequently on arrival of the wagon at Calcutta it was ascertained that 55 tins of ghee valued at Rs.919 had been removed from it, through it arrived sealed and locked. He concluded that “it is a matter of common knowledge that railway losses are inflicted on them principally by their own employees”. Commenting on the connivance of railway servants in the commission of crime on the railways the inspectors general of Police remarked in 1906, “if a railway Police officer is really to deal effectively with railway crime he must be at logger heads with  dishonest railway official if the subordinate railway Police were to devote much time and attention to watching the railway officials we should speedily have so much friction that the smooth working of the railway would be interfered with” .The situation  was further rendered difficult  by the inadequate sentences passed by magistrates trying railway cases .This was mainly due to the fact that they were unable to appreciate the meaning of certain technical evidence” In 1911 the railway Police met with a notable successes in apprehending a gang of Sanorias and minas who were notorious for railway thefts on the Bhopal section of the G.I.P. this was followed by the unearthing of a gang of Bhamptas in 1913.

                                The next landmark in the history of railway Police in India was the constitution of railway Police committee appointed under the home department resolution No.114 dated the 13 January 1921 which ran as under:-

                                       This committee made far reaching recommendations about strengthening the railway Police administration as well as the watch and ward unit. The communities recommended that a central bureau of information and advice should be created on railways. Mr. Deighton, Inspector General of Police Central Provinces expressing  his  views on the subject stated that “it would be desirable to have a senior railway Police officer attached to the railway Board in a position somewhat analogous to the Director of Central intelligence. He would be responsible for securing uniformity of   procedure in the railway Police through-out India and the appointment would result in the various railway Police systems carrying weight with railway administrations such an officer should however, have nothing whatever to do with the internal administration of the various railway Police forces. He may be assisted by a small detective force for each railway”. The committee also recommended that a special detective investigating agency in the railway police should be created in each province. The committee remarked “without use of detectives it is impossible to cope with frauds involving collusion between consignors and loading clerks, cheating by booking clerks, pilferage of fruits thefts from passenger trains thefts of railway material and other forms of railway crime”. The appointment of detective inspectors in the two railway Police charges in central province drew an appreciative reference form the Committee. The Committee suggested that “Whatever possible the experiment should made of putting a deputy superintendent incharge of sections with powers of superintendent”. The committee added that “the adoption of this system would have the advantage of economizing officers of Indian Police and giving new openings to the provincial service”. The committee concurred with the opinion expressed by a great majority of Police witnesses that special training should be given at all levels which would among other things include the study of Railway Act the methods of railway thefts, seal checking, signaling, the line clear system the routine observed in booking and parcel offices and goods sheds, railway methods of enquiry in the missing goods and so on.

                                   The period was also marked by certain administrative change of the Railway Police administrations of the Bombay-Baroda and Central India Railway. In the 1931-33 retrenchments, the separate independent post of the Superintendent of railway Police, Ajmer was withdrawn when the functions were taken over by the Police assistant to the agent to the Governor General (Inter Resident) for central India, Indore with one of the two deputy Superintendents   of   Police work. At that time the old railway Police post was transferred to Ajmer and in 1934.a second Deputy Superintendent of Railway Police was stationed at Indore. This arrangement continued  till June 1948 when on the disbandment of the central India agency Police (constitutional changes) the office of the Police assistant, central India agency disappeared  and the separate post of the Superintendent of Railway at Ajmer was revived, with a section officer Deputy Superintendent of Police of Indore.

                                       In 1987 Mr. R. N. Marsh Smith ,I.P., Inspector General of Police Gwalior State, reorganized railway Police on the Gwalior Light Railway as part of a scheme to thoroughly over-haul the Police forces of the State. He thus reported the reorganization of railway Police   to   Government  :-

    

                                           On 23rd September 1947, The Central Provinces administration was informed by the Government of India that "the civil and criminal jurisdiction exercised   by the Crown Representative over railway lands in Indian States territories was allowed to revert to the states concerned with effect from midnight of August 14th 1947. The existing arrangement regarding policing of the lines have , however been continued by virtue of Stand Still Agreement signed by the acceding States which specifically mentions existing police arrangements the result is that offences committed on railway lands and detected by the railway Police will hereafter be tried by the respective State Courts.” The States were informed of these arrangements and necessary notifications were issued by them.

                                             There was no radical change in the general pattern of railway crime in this period. However, the emergence of some new methods of crime on railway attracted notice. In 1923 a new type of railway criminal came to notice at Jabalpur. This ‘railway loafer’ used to hang about the station. On the plea of helping the travelers he bought them short distance tickets pocketing the balance of what should have been the full   fare for the full distance. In 1925 a Marwadi was charged with attempt to defraud the railway company of Rs. 42,000 the value of 212 pressed bales of cotton which were said to have been dispatched  from Chanda to Bombay and to have been destroyed by fire while in transit. As a result of an enquiry the Marwadi was charged with having removed the bales, with the connivance of certain subordinate railway officials and with having substituted waste cotton which was deliberately burnt while the train was in transit. The original 212 bales were found to have been dispatched to Pulgaon whence they had been re-booked to Delhi and sold to a merchant. In 1926 a new method of committing thefts was perfected on the Railways. It consisted in sprinkling a man’s pocket with sulphuric acid .When the cloth was sufficiently charred the contents of the pocket fell out . In 1933 four cases of administering stupefying drugs were registered. In one, a nreman was convicted but acquitted on appeal. The fireman was alleged to have mixed ‘dhatura; in the tea which he supplied to the engine staff, the suggested motive being to create an impression that the staff had been over-come by fumes of a new kind of coal which was being experimented on and which caused more labour  for the fireman than the ordinary coal. A new method of cheating occurred on the Bengal-Nagpur Railway passing through the Central Provinces. A Bengali gangman having overheard the station master telling some passengers that they could travel without tickets by obtaining permission from the guard boarded the same train and demanded fares from the passengers. On being to'd that the guard had given them permission he pretended talking through the alarm chain as a telephone and then told the passengers that the guard had ordered him to collect their fares. After collecting necessary money he disappeared   but was subsequently caught. In 1935 a Constable of Bina station house met two persons with new suit-cases. He was not satisfied with their explanation that they contained machine parts and on search found 50 seers of charas valued at rs. 5000 concealed in the suit-cases. Bhopal state was particularly used as a distributing centre for this contraband.  ‘Burkhas’ were considered useful for this purpose.