The third episode of the series examines the perceptions regarding the police and its relationship with different individuals and groups on the basis of their social identities. The police system is slowly becoming a weapon of choice for ensuring discipline and the episode dives into the values that guide this. The episode also delves into the messaging around the police force and the multiple ways in which it is expressed and/or experienced.
We are joined by the passionate Neeraj Shetye in this episode. Neeraj is the Partnerships and Communications Manager at the Oxford India Centre for Sustainable Development (OICSD) at Somerville College, University of Oxford. Prior to OICSD, Neeraj worked at the Oxford Internet Institute as a Research Support Officer. Neeraj consults grassroots collectives in India on program design and outreach.
We are again accepting submissions for the Uncuff India Prize, a creative competition where listeners can submit creative pieces basis the theme of the episode and they stand a chance to win a cash prize of INR 1500. You can find more information about the competition here. What are you waiting for?
Transcript
[Intro]
Sanchi
Hello everyone and welcome to our podcast Uncuff India by One Future Collective. My name is Sanchi and my pronouns are she, her.
Uttanshi
My name is Uttanshi and my pronouns are she and her. We are your hosts today and it’s so good to have you all listening in.
[Intro ends]
Uttanshi
In today’s episode, we will unpack police brutality by situating it in the context of the Indian socio economic and political context. It will also explore whether police brutality and the institution of law enforcement are characterised by any notions of toxic masculinity.
Sanchi
Yes, thank you, Uttanshi. As we know, police brutality has, over the past years, become a weapon of choice for many states to douse or weaken any protests or unrest. Not only has the regular recurrence made it normal but it has also begun to be glorified as a desired medium for ensuring law and order. The perception of the police force as a means of protection is rapidly changing in how only a very select few are protected at the expense of others and it can now then be argued that the police has become a mere symbol of state power.
Uttanshi
To discuss this and to share their insights on the topic with us, we have with us Neeraj. Neeraj is an aspiring public policy researcher with an interest in Indian social policy and its social justice approach. He is currently working as the Research Support Officer at the Oxford Internet Institute at the University of Oxford. Most recently, he graduated with an MSc in Politics of Conflict Rights and Justice from the School of Oriental, Asian and African Studies (SOAS), University of London. At SOAS, he was affiliated with the Center on Conflict Rights and Justice as a graduate Research associate and worked as a SOAS Digital Ambassador. At SOAS, he co-curated a three-day conference celebrating 75 years of Indian independence with a progressive critique of the system ‘India at 75 in Review’. He has been involved with grassroots initiatives in India since the COVID-19 pandemic such as Khana Chahiye Foundation, a hunger relief operation in Mumbai, and Eklavya India Foundation in Central India. Thank you so much Neeraj for taking the time out to be able to participate in this podcast and to share your really valuable insights. We’re very excited to hear from you and learn from you over the course of this episode.
Neeraj
Thank you Uttanshi and thank you Sanchi for the introduction and thank you for this opportunity. I’m glad to be connected with One Future Collective today.
Sanchi
Thank you so much, Neeraj. And yes, thanks for joining us today to discuss this extremely pertinent topic and we are really looking forward to hear from you on it. So let me start straight away and ask you- what are your own thoughts about the police. How do you perceive the police system and if this perception has changed over the years?
Neeraj
To be frank, I think I need to clarify my positionality and that’s very important because when one talks about police brutality and one talks about the perception of police, it’s important to know the socioeconomic background of the person who’s speaking because that affects a lot of how people view the police. Over the past few years, I’ve realised that my positionality, of course, comes from a much more privileged space where police as a protector was the only way that we saw the police and that’s how it was described in, say, family drawing room discussions that we had and growing up, I mean, some of my family members were a part of that institution. So that created this perception of police being the protective force for the general population, but over the past few years, I realised that, you know, with my work on the field and with engaging with initiatives on the ground, the perception is different and not everyone looks at the police with the same mindset and that has led me to question the whole idea of whether the police force is merely a protective force. Can it be an oppressive force, and if yes, then what are the ways in which we can sort of reform it? But yeah, my perception has changed over the past years and that is only due to my engagement with activists and grassroots collectives and communities on the ground.
Uttanshi
Thank you so much for that, Neeraj. I feel, you know when I was listening to you speak, even I was thinking about what my perception initially was given my background, my family, and similar to you what I heard my parents describe the police to be and how it has changed. Do you want to share a little bit about- what do you think led to this change in perception for you and what do you think forms the core of the police system? And do you think that the messaging around the police itself is reflective of, or you know, or believes in this core themselves? What are the agents from which this messaging is received about the police, what they do, who they are, what is their role in the society, etc.
Neeraj
Right, so I’ll answer your first question. I inherently see like multiple questions in this one conversation. So, the first question is about perception and how it changed and for me it was during the pandemic, the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 when I started engaging with Khana Chahiye Foundation, which was a hunger relief operation, and we worked on the ground and it was a civil society led initiative which was of course, had to be in tandem with the local government body, the police system and all of that. We reached out to communities in Mumbai specifically and around Mumbai who were absolutely in distress, and these were communities who had lost their only source of livelihood. And for us, COVID-19 was not like, for us who were on the ground, COVID-19 was not just a health emergency; it eventually became like this livelihoods emergency because people often said on the ground that, you know, COVID might not kill us, but hunger will, because there was people didn’t have the basic necessities for themselves. And in this whole situation, you could see people doing the absolute, you know, people resorting to absolutely desperate measures to ensure that their family is supported. They would go out. These were daily wage earners, right, so, they used to go out, try, to like, sometimes beg but also sell stuff on the ground and this was during the lockdown, so of course they were not met with the empathy that they deserved. And police became that force that was tasked with ensuring discipline on the streets and they would often, you know, resort to violence, straight up violence in these communities and their only explanation to us was that, you know, if you don’t instill this kind of discipline with the lathi, people wouldn’t listen to them. So, it was almost like they had infantilized the whole population and that was like the beginning of how I started viewing the police not just as the protective force, but also like this patronizing force that was trying to instill, that was apparently tasked with instilling discipline in the population, which is, which I feel is should not be how the police system functions because that’s not their responsibility to instill this certain idea of discipline into the population. The idea is to ensure that there is law and order and to ensure that you know things can things are moving swiftly and smoothly as possible but resorting to violence for towards the general population is not the way to go and that doesn’t create a very, that doesn’t help the police perception to be very honest. What are the core ideals now? I believe that I don’t know what forms the core ideal, of course, violence might be one of it. Discipline, as in a certain idea of discipline also forms this core idea of the Indian police system. But I know for a fact that empathy doesn’t form, empathy is not a part of those core values. And of course, that doesn’t mean I’m generalizing. There are, of course, I’ve come across police officers who have been quite empathetic towards, you know, but those are as individuals outside, sometimes even outside the police, outside the police uniform they have been empathetic individuals. But in general, I don’t feel empathy is a part of the police system and there are a lot of problems to that. We can discuss it later, but I feel, yeah, that’s the problem. The core values are very rigid. There’s a certain idea of, you know, control that the police resort to and that is, I feel, not so relevant into this society.
Sanchi
Yeah. Thank you so much for sharing that with us, Neeraj and something that you mentioned really stood out to me that how violence may be seen as a core value of the police system, especially in India, but empathy unfortunately is not. And taking from that, you have also already mentioned right in the beginning the importance of looking at one’s own positionality when thinking about what our perception of the police system is. Taking on from that, I would like to ask you how do you think different people perceive or experience the system of police and how different it is for different people, how does it happen or what do you think forms the basis for this difference? And I think the core values that we just spoke of may have a lot to do with it, so I’m curious to know your thoughts on it.
Neeraj
Fundamentally, I feel the way police as a unit is even looked at changes a lot of things and this is rooted in the socioeconomic backgrounds of individuals, communities in spaces like metropolitan spaces like Mumbai and I can speak for Mumbai, but I know a lot of these factors might be the same in other parts of the country, might not be the same- again, there are other factors. There are other social factors such as you know, the religion of an individual, caste identity of an individual, all of these factors do contribute, but in urban spaces like Mumbai also like economic factors, right. Your class background matters and that generally shapes the opinion one has of the police, so you would see like, I mean the bottom strata of the society, the lower class, the working-class communities of the city is often scared of the police in a way. I mean there’s a certain form of fear which is not the same among middle class or upper middle class or upper even the upper class of the society, right, the economically well-off class of the society. They look at police in a very different way and I’ve engaged with all kinds of people in the past few years, and I’ve noticed that the way police exert their power also differs. They know for a fact that working class communities are easy targets, working class communities can be ‘disciplined’, can be used, you know, can be dominated through their perception. So that affects in the way we view the police and also police view themselves, right? So, they are, certainly, like I’ve seen police members, police officers, change their demeanor over time when they move from neighborhood to neighborhood. So, you’ll have, like someone being excessively dominating in a very, you know that masculine kind of a way in a working-class neighborhood but that same person would be extremely quiet, in a very quiet demeanor in like you know, in an upper middle-class neighborhood. And that’s, I mean that also shows how police view themselves, where and how they operate in certain spaces, so I feel socioeconomic factors do contribute to a lot of perceptive reality. I mean, of course middle-class background, I mean people coming from the middle-class often have representation in the police force, so they have a very different way of looking at the police. They look at them as a fellow community member, but that’s not the case for people coming from working-class neighborhoods. A lot of them do not have that kind of representation in the police force so they often look at the police as like a danger more than more than someone that they can look up to for protection. So yeah, that, I mean that’s the way I think socioeconomic factors contribute a lot.
Sanchi
Yeah, I think it is. That highlights very well how the class background of a person might so deeply affect how they view the police and I was wondering if you’d also like to shed some light on how a person’s identity markers such as caste or gender might also play into this perception.
Neeraj
Absolutely. I mean, as I mentioned before, when we work in the working-class neighborhoods of the city, now who is the working class, right? A majority of the working-class neighborhoods that we have worked in came from religious minority backgrounds, especially Muslims and also oppressed caste communities. Now these communities haven’t had that kind of privilege where they could participate in the labor force in the same way that other communities have and a lot of these communities are Dalit Bahujan. Communities who have settled in these certain, you know, ghettoized neighborhoods, and that’s an offensive word in a way, but I mean, social scientists tend to call them these ghettos around the city, and communities here have clustered themselves in and these are specific neighborhoods. Anybody who works on the field knows for a fact that this is the reality on the ground and anyone who disagrees with it clearly hasn’t is clearly intentional or doesn’t know how to look at the society in a general way. So, if you look at Indian society, of course most majority, I mean most metropolitan cities would have these clusters which are deemed to be dangerous, right? And we have noticed that they are given some very offensive slang terms which I do not want to repeat them on today here, but I think people would know what those slangs would be and those are very offensive, often associated with religious minorities, often associated with oppressed caste communities. This idea of criminalization is imposed on these communities and that’s the reality. I mean it’s time for, I feel people coming from privileged backgrounds, social scientists coming from privileged backgrounds to accept that reality, acknowledge that there is something fundamentally wrong with their own communities and start reflecting on those values themselves rather than, you know, preaching some form of ideas onto the already oppressed community. So, I think those ideas matter, those identity markers are exceptionally important when one analyzes police in general, policing forces in general, yeah.
Uttanshi
Thank you so much, Neeraj and while I was listening to you speak, there’s just so much to, I think think back to you know and while you were speaking, I’m thinking where are these ideas of violence, disciplining, protection, etc. coming from, right, and how do they drive or shape the police person’s behavior or their actions? And you know, and I know that this is something you study very, very fondly and you know, you’ve been very interested to understand this phenomenon as well but, you know, tying back to the point about what you said, right, almost clearly that came out of what you were saying was empathy is not a part of the system, maybe as part of an individual person when they are not wearing their uniform, but there is a certain level of violence, a certain duty towards maintaining discipline, a certain level of harshness, if I may say so, that gets associated with the identity of a police person. What do you think drives that identity and what do you think, you know, is there something that drives that identity at all? And if yes, what according to you, is that?
Neeraj
Of course, there is this idea, this very idea of masculinity that drives it, that you know someone has to be more assertive, someone who has to be physically, you know, in a particular shape, of course has to be like this macho person, if I can use that word, and should have that certain idea of confidence and harshness as Uttanshi said. These ideas are stemming out of this idea of masculinity that has been normalized and this masculinity has taken different shapes over time. And in today’s time, we see a different kind of like a Hindu nationalist masculinity that is being portrayed in a particular way, but of course, there are other forms of masculinity as well. But this core idea of masculine identity, which is considered to be, you know, with this particular idea of voice, tone, physical demeanor, all of these things together form this idea of what ideal policemen or ideal protective force should be. And this comes from a larger idea of defense forces, I feel, so police force is just like the localised form of protection service, but then the larger idea of the military and the defense forces that are there and the way they are shaped right, that inherently also contributes to how localized protection forces or localized even vigilante groups see themselves. This whole idea of ‘hamare Jawan’ (our soldiers) right, I mean ‘Jawan khade hain sarhad par’ (the soldiers guard the borders) and this whole idea of exerting force, dominating and constantly being aggressive and that aggression gets translated into very localised formats. So when I for example, worked on the local right-wing groups in India, I noticed that their idea of masculinity is also stemming from this idea of how the protective forces see themselves, these defense forces see themselves and they would try to nurture it. I felt that these were people who had aspirations to join these forces but never got through, which is why now they are victim of this whole idea of this whole notion of Hindu nationalism and dominating certain other oppressed groups. So it’s very, it’s not that complicated, but at the same time it is, and the nuance is necessary and we haven’t been able to sort of like, you know, dissect that nuance that well. But it definitely stems from a very aggressive personality that forms the whole idea of Indian masculinity today.
Uttanshi
Yeah, and every time I watch anything to do with, you know, police representation, even in pop culture, for example, there is a very streamlined understanding, appearance, behaviour, you know that that they depict and just thinking back to a few of these shows that you know have aired for I think years now and have been fairly popular, it’s not just to say that you know, only the male police officers behave a certain way. This movement and this reliance on aggression, this reliance on I have more power than you because I am in a certain uniform and I have a certain level of state backing, I think, permeates across genders who serve on these forces as well. This is, of course, not to generalize and to, you know, to echo your point earlier about how it is something that everybody within the forces do, but as a system, it is something that really encourages it that hinges on these. Do you have anything to add to that as well? I’m just curious to know because you know, often when we talk about toxic masculinity, there is an association of genders as well and how it may be useful for us to perhaps think of it as a set of behavior patterns, perhaps a set of, you know, beliefs and attitudes that can permeate across genders as well.
Neeraj
No, I absolutely agree because this idea of masculinity has been so deeply rooted in the police system and as I said before, empathy doesn’t form the core value of it because generally in our Indian understanding, empathy is associated with femininity for some reason, right? I mean, you are not that harsh or you are not a decisive person for some reason and your heart bleeds for somebody constantly are these ideas. I’ve noticed that when you talk about empathy in the context on the ground, you’re often associated with, like, you know not-so-masculine ideas, I don’t want to say exclusively feminine ideas too, but again, not-so-masculine ideas. It doesn’t have a space in toxic masculinity. The only way you show empathy is like towards your family but your masculinity in public arena does not have empathy driving the way you function. And I honestly believe, of course, pop culture has a lot to blame, but then again, this is coming from someone, like for myself, I have distanced myself from engaging with pop culture that much. So, if you ask me, the last film I watched, of course I haven’t watched films in the past, like I haven’t watched a film where they would show something like this in the past year or two. I do watch some documentaries, but that idea still permeates. I mean, I realized that there was some conversation among my friends about Pathaan, a more recent movie also carrying this idea of, you know, this really masculine portrayal of a defense officer and a policing officer, all of that. So, our pop culture has portrayed those values, but how much of it has already been in our system is something that we need to reflect on because, of course, these ideas are coming from somewhere. The pop culture hasn’t really just written it by themselves; there were these ideas already, of course pop culture has exaggerated it now and that kind of creates a pressure on say, women who want to be a part of the policing force, right? I mean, even today, like I don’t think Indian army allows women in combat forces and why doesn’t it allow it? I mean this whole idea that women can’t be violent, or women can’t be associated with anything remotely related to violence and that’s a very, I mean you can see how toxic masculinity there engages with and shapes really, the social fabric of even femininity. What is Indian femininity? What is, I mean who gets to be a part of it, so all of that. So of course, I mean it is does have an effect on gender per se and pop culture does play a big role in shaping how those narratives are portrayed.
Sanchi
Yeah. Thank you so much for bringing up all those very important points, Neeraj and what I’m hearing a lot is about how hegemonic masculinity actually affects the police force and how we’ve been talking about empathy, we’ve been talking about the gendering of the police forces and how that’s so detrimental to everybody involved in the process. And we have understood that it is toxic masculinity that affects a lot of our perception or how the police force itself is constructed, but I want to understand why is that a problem? If that is something, if that is the ethos of the police force, then why do we think that it is a problem that is the core value? And if you do think that it is a problem, then how can we imagine alternatives for it?
Neeraj
I mean, this is so like, this is like asking someone to change the social fabric of the country because that’s the understanding we are rooted in, that understanding of what masculinity is so much that, an alternative to that would be a more empathetic police force and that can only happen, I believe, and this is my personal opinion, of course it can change and people might have different opinions is by two ways, is that you counsel the existing police force into dealing better with, you know, with the constituents, with the communities that they’re dealing with, right. So, if a police officer is posted in like a working-class neighborhood in an urban space, of course they have to be mindful of the power dynamic they have and they share with the community because, of course, it’s not going to be, it’s not that straightforward and it’s going to be a bit, I mean, it’s unbalanced, right? I mean, and the working-class communities will look at the police officer not just as a protective force, but sometimes also as an oppressive force and this is what I’ve seen recurrently on the ground- that people are scared. People are scared by these officers who are expected to serve them, right, by the force that was expected to serve them. So that counselling has to go through. Secondly, I feel recruitment matters a lot because who forms the police force, how many of them are given responsibility in a particular area, all of that matters because the conversations I’ve had with existing police officers, especially even like some of my family members, not my close family, but of course my extended family members, is that there’s a lot of stress and workload on these police officers to solve a certain number of cases every month. And this is again with the fact that they have to appease the politicians, the local politicians, the national politicians, all of these people. So that stress gets added on and all of this comes out when they work and this comes out in a very harsh way on the people unfortunately, on the communities that they’re serving and say, for a fact that if you are posted in a community where you can show that kind of dominance, it just ends up becoming a toxic cycle because then you exert that force on that community, the community doesn’t look at you very nicely and there’s again the problem and that cycle continues. So, I believe recruitment again, there are two aspects of recruitment. One is the number of police officers that are being recruited, the number has to increase for a fact. I know for a fact that Mumbai is, I mean in Maharashtra, the police recruitment was stalled for a couple of years and people were waiting for that and that still didn’t, I mean that didn’t happen and then when it happened, they had fewer seats as compared to the applications that they had. So that’s one problem. Secondly, who constitutes, what is the socioeconomic identity of police officers who are recruited? Because let’s not forget the fact that defense and the police force or these State sponsored roles were a form of social mobility for a lot of oppressed groups. So of course, like people coming from oppressed caste backgrounds, they had their own regiments after a point in the military and that was a form of social mobility because you get certain benefits, you raise your living standards and that has helped a lot of communities come out of absolute poverty and helped with representation. And I personally feel that when the police officer has a lived experience of living through an intimidated environment, they are much more approachable when they are police officers because I’ve worked with, like I’ve seen police officers in action who came from oppressed communities and they knew the realities on the ground. And they, of course like, I’m not saying that they were all innocent or at the same time very violent, but they had a better balance of this, right? I mean for example someone’s a police officer coming from say my community, who is relatively privileged, would not have the same perception towards, I mean, of course they will not have the same perception towards the working-class neighborhoods of the city or the oppressed communities in the city. But if a person is recruited from that community or if young people from there are given an opportunity to be part of police force, not only will they be more approachable to the general populace, but they’ll also be, I mean they would know how to be vigilant without being oppressive. So, I think that kind of reform, there has to be a balanced reform. I mean, I am not someone who would say completely defund, that we don’t need the police force and let the communities do whatever. But at the same time, I wouldn’t say that, you know, you task the police force with every single responsibility. They shouldn’t be in charge of, I mean, we have seen in the past few years how police officers have dealt with, say, victims of sexual assault and victims of rape and they are not the right, they are not the right entity within the force. So, I feel representation as a whole matters and within representation again, I mean this whole idea of who is forming the police force decides how the police force is going to function in a particular neighborhood.
Uttanshi
You know, something that you said that really stood out to me and I that was actually something I wanted to ask you anyway and it seems like a good setup for the follow-up is just, you know, what do you think is the relevance of the police today, especially in the context of police abolition movements? And you know, you’ve already said you’re not in favor of completely defunding the police system and you know, for the communities to be in charge overall and not to have police systems at all. I think at the root of their belief is also the fact that reform is not something that’s possible and realistically doable. But I’m very curious to know, you know, what your thoughts are on that.
Neeraj
As I mentioned before, I mean, of course reform can come in many ways and one way is to have that kind of counselling, training and you know that psychiatric support to the police that is needed that would ensure immediately that can be looked at as a potential solution. But I also don’t understand the abolition movement in India because this is a very US centric approach. I mean when the George Floyd thing happened suddenly there were conversations about police reforms and that showed how little do Indian Liberal activists who started this whole conversation knew about what’s already happening. So, if you speak to organisations who are working with say criminalized or Denotified Tribes and have at the like, I fortunately I could like, I’ve spoken to lawyers, I’ve spoken to activists and development researchers on the ground and their reality is that it’s been happening for every day. Like there’s a George Floyd kind of case happening in India every single day but that never gets any attention from these constant liberal circles of activism which is needed. I feel like you don’t need for a George Floyd thing to happen in the US for a conversation to start in India, it’s very different. Police brutality is a daily occurrence for a lot of communities here and it’s important like when I say I don’t completely believe in defunding the police again it’s a very let me just acknowledge the fact that it’s an opinion coming out of privilege. I mean, of course there are communities who would completely detest for that statement to come in because for them police is an oppressive force and this is more and more real and I think the police force knows about it, but that’s the way they have been trained to function. So, I believe the immediate solution to this problem would be one counseling the police force in a much better way, creating more empathetic police officers who are more understanding in their approach while, I mean, there’s there has to be a balance between instilling whatever the idea of discipline is, but at the same time not go around hitting the lathi to people who are on the ground sometimes even earning their daily wage right. So that kind of empathy is important and secondly I believe representation has the key to at least to solve some of these issues like. If members of the communities that have often been on the oppressed side of the cycle get a chance to be represented in the in the force, in the in the police force, I believe that could change a lot, change police’s perception in general in India in a lot of areas. So that is the solution. So, I don’t completely believe, I don’t buy this whole American idea of you know what is defunding the police because it’s relevant there because the police forces are already getting like they’re overfunded. But in India that’s not the case. I mean I believe a lot of police departments are still underfunded. I mean the more you go towards the grassroots, you realize that police absolutely have not even the basic necessities to support the communities. So sometimes it’s like victims come to them for help, they don’t really have the measures. In general, I mean, cyber cell, the Nirbhaya cell, all happened after major incidences, so we are a very reactionary democracy, right? So we wait for a major incident to happen, after which we start introducing reforms. But that shouldn’t be the case. I think the pandemic was a good learning opportunity. I believe major police forces like Mumbai police force would take that into consideration when they design their training programs, right? They should have more, I mean better training programs, mental health support, maybe for police officers, also for the victims that that are coming to them for seeking help, and let professionals, more and more professionals be integrated into the system who know how to deal with the situation more effectively because a police officer is not a psychologist, not a psychiatrist, is not someone who can provide overall support to anyone. Their job is to ensure law and order, which I think they should be tasked only with that, not with like other responsibilities that would take that time out from here and create newer problems for the society.
Sanchi
Yeah. Thank you so much for bringing that up, Neeraj and I think it’s been very interesting listening to you share this perspective. And of course, nobody has to agree on anything, but it’s been very enlightening to hear your perspective on why you think cultural context matters so much. And something that might work in the US or in Global North countries might not work in our country or in the Global South countries as a whole as well. So, thank you so much for sharing your insights on that. I think it has been really good to listen in to you today and I think our listeners would agree to that as well. But before we close, I was wondering if you have any last points that you want to share with us.
Neeraj
No, the only thing I would say is I mean we need police reforms in India. It’s a deeply tainted sector which needs support not just from, like the government because they fund it, but it also needs there has to be better ways for the police to engage with the community. I mean civil society needs to play a role in this matter and make sure that civil society is not demonized for helping out the police force in any way. So yeah, I think, there are some really good, I’m not some major authoritative voice to speak on this, but there are some phenomenal organizations and individuals working on the ground who need to be consulted, who can be better, I think better voices for the police force to work with. So I believe that every state has it, every district almost has it or at least the major ones. So I think the police forces can use these resources in improving because this would help the communities better, this would help the police better, this would help the communities to look at the police in a better way. So yeah, that’s the only closing thought I have.
Uttanshi
Thank you so much, Neeraj. It’s been really great listening to you, hearing from you, learning from you. And I really do think that our listeners will have a lot to take back with them and to you know continue thinking about this particular conversation that we have had. So, thank you so much for taking the time out to come and speak to us today.
Neeraj
Thank you for the opportunity. I’m glad that One Future Collective has started these conversations and it’s important that we take these ahead. So thank you for the opportunity and thank you for having me.
[Outro]
Uttanshi
Thank you for tuning in today. Please leave us any questions you may have as voice notes on Anchor or in our DMs. We would love to hear from you. This podcast is brought to you by One Future Collective.
Sanchi
Yes, thank you so much. And don’t forget to follow us on Instagram and Facebook @onefuturecollective and onefuture_india on Twitter. And keep an eye out for future episodes out every second and fourth Thursday of the month. Until next time.
[Outro ends]