Chandigarh:A warning once made from the floor of the Punjab Vidhan Sabha is increasingly being recalled amid growing political debate over the functioning of the police and the use of state power in Punjab.
Congress MLA and former Punjab minister Pargat Singh had raised a sharp concern in the Assembly, warning that Punjab was moving towards becoming a “police state.” In his pointed political language, he questioned whether the people of Punjab had effectively “handed over our beard in the hands of the police” — a phrase that captured his concern about excessive dependence on police power in matters of governance and public life.
The expression was more than political rhetoric. It raised a fundamental question: In a democracy, should citizens feel that their security, liberty, and ability to raise their voices depend entirely on the police and the political establishment controlling the police machinery?
Pargat Singh’s warning has acquired renewed relevance as opposition parties have repeatedly accused the Punjab government of using the police against political opponents, protesters and dissenting voices.
In March 2026, during proceedings in the Punjab Assembly, Pargat Singh again urged the government not to turn Punjab into a police state. He also questioned the circumstances surrounding a series of encounters and demanded that such cases be independently examined.His concerns are not confined to one particular incident or one political party. They go to the heart of the relationship between the citizen, government and police.
From “law and order” to “police power”
A government is expected to maintain law and order, protect citizens and enforce the law. But democratic governance requires an equally important principle: the police must remain accountable to the law and institutions, rather than becoming an instrument of political power.That distinction is crucial.When citizens begin to believe that questioning the government can invite police action, that political disagreements can become criminal cases, or that protests can be dealt with primarily through police force, public confidence in democratic institutions begins to weaken.This is precisely why the phrase “police state” carries such political weight.The Indian Express, reporting on the Punjab Assembly session in February 2025, noted that Pargat Singh had described Punjab as a “police state” during his intervention on the issue of sand mining.
The political significance of Pargat Singh’s remarks lies in the fact that the question is bigger than the AAP government, Congress or any other political party.If police power becomes the primary answer to political disagreement, every government eventually risks inheriting the same weapon.Today’s ruling party may use the machinery against its opponents. Tomorrow, another party may inherit that same machinery.That is why the debate should not simply be reduced to AAP versus Congress.
The real question is:
Who controls the police?
Who holds the police accountable?
And who protects the ordinary citizen when the citizen is questioning the government itself?
Punjab has a long history of political mobilisation, public protest and powerful democratic movements. Its people have never been known for quietly accepting injustice.Therefore, the idea that citizens might have to think twice before protesting, questioning or criticising those in power is particularly disturbing.Pargat Singh’s metaphor about “handing over our beard to the police” therefore carries a deeper message: a democratic society cannot surrender its independence of thought and expression to the machinery of the state.Police are essential to democracy but police power cannot become a substitute for democratic governance.The government must answer allegations of misuse of the police through transparency, independent investigations and institutional accountability rather than political confrontation.
The debate is no longer simply about whether Pargat Singh’s description was politically exaggerated.The larger question is whether Punjab is moving towards a system in which police authority is becoming increasingly central to political and administrative governance.If that perception is allowed to grow, it can damage public trust regardless of which party occupies the government benches.Pargat Singh’s old warning, therefore, deserves to be heard again not as a Congress slogan, but as a democratic question:Have the people of Punjab really handed over their “beard” to the police or will elected governments ensure that the police remain servants of the Constitution, rather than instruments of political power?
Disclaimer: This article and accompanying images are for informational and illustrative purposes only. Some visuals may be AI-generated or digitally enhanced and may not depict actual events or persons.Views expressed are based on publicly available information and analysis