Police and public safety are unique to cities; urban policing is a specialized system of law enforcement, policing and monitoring of community safety and public safety. Its application is different from traditional crime control, considering crime prevention, the defense of the most vulnerable in the community, the preservation of order, engagement of the community and the establishment of safe, inclusive and accessible urban centres.
Urban policing combines legal enforcement, technology, urban planning, and community engagement to address complex risks posed by the density, diversity, mobility, and anonymity of the city’s population.
Examples of Urban Policing
Beat Policing in Metropolitan Areas (India): Routine foot and vehicle patrols in crowded markets, metro stations, and residential districts to deter crime and make police more visible by way of beat patrols by Delhi and Mumbai Police.
Women on the Move: SHE teams of Hyderabad, designed proactively to prevent sexual harassment in public places, through patrolling, decoy operations, counseling, and action taken quickly by the courts.
Technology-Enhanced Policing: CCTV network, GPS enabled police vehicle, emergency response applications such as Himmat (Delhi) and Suraksha (Bengaluru) have made the response to crises and monitoring within the city faster. The Mohalla Committees in Mumbai, and the neighbourhood policing in New York City, where police officers collaborate with their neighbourhoods to ensure proper safety and develop trust.
Safe City (Smart City policing): Integrated command and control centres under India’s Smart Cities Mission, which integrates monitoring, traffic management and emergency response to ensure urban safety.
International Examples: Safer Neighbourhood Teams in London, localized policing to protect vulnerable groups. The little community cops in Tokyo’s Koban system, small neighbourhood police posts to guarantee regular access and community engagement. In its essence, urban policing sees that cities cannot be solved with reactive policing but must adopt a preventive, participatory, rights-oriented approach to law enforcement appropriate for the complicated environment of urban life.
Protection of Women and Other Groups
Today, urban policing is bigger than just crime prevention. At its heart, it is about making sure that all people can enter and use public spaces with dignity and without fear. In rapidly increasing cities, women, children, elderly persons with disabilities, and disadvantaged people are more likely to be at a high risk. These risks develop from two main sources – structural weaknesses in urban planning and policing systems, and pervasive societal perceptions that make harassment, discrimination and exclusion seem natural.
Statutory Framework in India
India’s law is comprehensive to safeguard women and marginalised groups. According to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), Sections 74–78 provide for offences such as: outraging woman’s modesty, sexual harassment, and stalking. Words, conduct or gestures said to insult women can be criminalized under section 79, while acts related to rape are prohibited under section 63 of the BNS, while Section 64 includes an explanation explaining aggravated sexual assault for those who assault a woman.
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) enhances preventative and procedural safeguards. Sections 168 to 170 enable the police to act as agents of prevention thus preventing cognizable offences. Section 35 provides for the arrest without warrant in specific cases of crimes against women, while Section 179 limits the summoning of women to police stations, upholding the dignity and sensitivities related to investigation.
Protection is bolstered through several special legislations. Examples include the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005; the Juvenile Justice Act 2015, applicable for children in conflict with the law or in need of care; the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016, governing where and how women are afforded access; the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, which deals with systemic violence against all vulnerable groups; and judicial interventions and judicial reviews.
The judiciary played a big part in helping to define victim-centric policing. In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), the Supreme Court set some rules for workplace sexual harassment. These regulations later became the cornerstone of the POSH Act, 2013. The Court stated in Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India (1995) that victims should be compensated and that in India police forces must be sensitive. The Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) judgment, based on a case of acid attack, resulted in stricter rules regarding the sale of acids and increased accountability on the part of the police.
Strategies for Ground-Level Policing
On the ground, policing strategy has metamorphosed to respond more immediately to issues of safety. Beat policing and patrol in hot spots like markets, bus stops and metro stations increase visibility and deterrence. Cities including Delhi and Mumbai have sent in Mahila Patrols, women police squads that increase approachability and trust. The Safe City Projects, supported by the Nirbhaya Fund, include CCTV surveillance, panic buttons in public transport, GPS-enabled vehicles and women help desks.
Hyderabad’s SHE Teams are at the forefront of best practice, utilizing decoy operations and swift action to curb harassment. Community policing programmes are equally important. Meira Paibi groups in Manipur, which are women-led vigil collectives, are collaborating with the police; Mumbai’s Mohalla Committees and the like champion neighbourhood-level dispute resolution and safety monitoring.
Technology has also furthered policing, with the launch of mobile safety apps like Himmat (Delhi Police) and Suraksha (Bengaluru), as well as predictive policing tools powered by artificial intelligence to identify crime hotspots.
Kolkata Police operates a number of year-round community policing programmes that help some segments of society more or less all year round. These are Nabadisha for the care and rehabilitation of street children, Pronam for the safety, assistance, and emotional support of senior citizens, Kiran to protect and empower vulnerable peoples, and Tejashwini for the safety, confidence and advancement of girls and women. Taken together, these initiatives illustrate a sustained and inclusive strategy of community inclusion, social welfare, and police and public trust.
Comparative Global Practices
New York City’s Neighbourhood Policing Program focuses on a longer-term engagement approach: officers have their assigned precincts and communities. This allows for trust, information sharing and problem-oriented policing based on accountability and a problem-based approach. Tools such as CompStat draw on data to drive targeted interventions and balance enforcement with accountability and community trust.
There are Safer Neighbourhood Teams in London that also are focused on policing in cities with a focus on women and other minority and vulnerable populations. Special ward-level officers work with residents, local council and services. This model stresses the importance of visibility, reassurance, and early intervention to prevent crime and address specific issues of concern in order that these problems can be dealt with and the community concerns addressed earlier.
Tokyo’s Koban system serves as a preventive and community based urban policing model of city policing. By providing immediate outreach and regular presence of the community-focused policing with local police stations in small neighbourhoods, police stations help police officers remain open and get familiar with residents. Frequent foot patrols and guidance services, as well as local expertise, enable high public trust, rapid responses as well as low crime.
Drawbacks
Urban policing often struggles to effectively protect women and other vulnerable groups. Chronic understaffing, limited training, resource crunch, and a lack of sensitivity among police personnel weaken responses on the ground. Slow response times, low community trust, and the fear of secondary victimisation often discourage survivors from reporting crimes. In addition, gender bias, the absence of specialised units, poor use of technology, and weak coordination with social services further reduce the system’s effectiveness, leaving many victims without adequate protection or support.
Policy Recommendations
The following responses are necessary to improve urban environments to be safer and more inclusive:
- Establish dedicated women safety units in every police station.
- Perform gender audits of infrastructure built for large groups in cities such as lighting, transport, and sanitation.
- Expand fast-track courts for crimes against women and vulnerable groups.
- Mandate sensitivity and gender training for police forces.
- Incorporate social workers and counsellors into police response teams.
- Conduct sustained public awareness campaigns to challenge and change harmful social norms.
Conclusion
Urban policing should transform from a control mentality into a values-based and inclusive design that prioritises dignity, access, and public trust. Women and marginalised communities should be treated no less than equal claimants with their own experiences which should guide policy making and policing. It’s only when legal guardrails are properly put in place, when technology is used intelligently, when communities are actually involved and when institutions are held responsible that urban places can truly be safe, inclusive, and just for everyone.
