In the disciplined ranks of law enforcement, where integrity and conduct define the thin line between order and chaos, the recent suspension of Constable Ashish Kumar Tiwari in Motihari serves as a sobering reminder of the standard expected of those who wear the uniform. Serving at the Motihari police line, Tiwari found himself at the center of an internal investigation after he publically laid claim to a familial connection with Bharat Tiwari, an individual who had recently died in an encounter-related incident in Bhojpur. In a profession where truth is the cornerstone of every investigation, claiming a misleading relationship with a controversial figure drew immediate scrutiny from the East Champaran police leadership.
The investigation was spearheaded by the East Champaran Superintendent of Police, Swarn Prabhat, who initiated a formal review of the constable’s sudden and vocal social media activity. Recognizing that such claims could potentially bring disrepute to the force or muddy the waters of the ongoing investigations in Bhojpur, the SP tasked the local Deputy Superintendent of Police with a thorough audit of the constable’s statements. The inquiry concluded quickly, leaving little room for ambiguity; the SP announced the constable’s immediate suspension, citing a grave breach of professional discipline that the department could no longer overlook.
To ascertain the validity of the constable’s claims, officials conducted a ground-level investigation, reaching out to the source of both families’ histories: Bilauti village. A local chowkidar, a traditional guardian of village records and social history, provided the definitive account needed to settle the matter. The verification process confirmed that while both men hailed from the same geographic origin, there was absolutely no blood kinship between them. They were neither brothers nor even distant paternal cousins. By fabricating this proximity to a man involved in a violent encounter, Tiwari had effectively compromised the neutrality and professional standing required of a police officer.
However, the suspension was not merely a reaction to a single instance of misleading social media behavior; it was the breaking point in a pattern of volatile conduct that had plagued Tiwari’s career for years. Behind the scenes, the internal review revealed a history that painted a picture of an officer consistently at odds with the demands of his duty. This recent episode was simply the latest chapter in a narrative of disciplinary issues that had already marred his record, forcing the department to weigh his continued presence against their commitment to maintaining a professional police force.
His past transgressions were marked by alarming incidents of aggression that go far beyond typical administrative infractions. During his tenure with the “Panther team”—a squad meant to be the elite, swift-response wing of the police—at Piprakothi police station, Tiwari was involved in a shocking altercation where he allegedly discharged his service pistol at a fellow officer while they were on duty. The gravity of such an act led to intense departmental proceedings, resulting in the withholding of two increments. A criminal case regarding that incident remains active and sub judice, hanging over his career even today, yet the department had clearly hoped for a change in behavior that never quite materialized.
Adding to this troubling professional trajectory was another violent incident occurring during his posting at the Harpur police station. In that instance, Tiwari was accused of physically assaulting a home guard jawan with a knife, an act of internal hostility that once again necessitated formal intervention. That proceedings resulted in the loss of his increments for eighteen months, serves as a testament to the department’s previous attempts to correct his behavior through disciplinary measures. Ultimately, the cumulative weight of these violent outbursts and the recent false public claims forced the hand of his superiors, leading to his removal and a broader institutional message that the badge is not a shield for those who act in defiance of the law they are sworn to uphold.