The recent brutal custodial death of Ajith Kumar in Sivaganga, Tamil Nadu  has once again highlighted the deep-rooted problem of police torture and impunity.

What is Custodial Torture and Custodial Death?

• Custodial Torture: Custodial torture refers to the infliction of physical or psychological suffering on individuals held in custody by police or other authorities. It is a gross violation of human rights and personal dignity.
• Types of Custodial Torture:
• • Physical Torture: Beatings, electric shocks, suffocation, sexual violence, stress positions, and denial of medical aid.
  • Psychological Torture: Threats, humiliation, sleep deprivation, solitary confinement, mock executions.
  • Forced Confessions: Using torture to coerce detainees into confessing to crimes.
• Custodial Death: Custodial death refers to a fatality that occurs when an individual is in police or judicial custody. Often, these deaths result from torture, abuse, or negligence during detention.

Police Custody Vs Judicial Custody

Safeguards Against Custodial Torture and Death in India

Constitutional Safeguards

• Article 14: Guarantees equality before the law; no one is above the law, including law enforcement.
• Article 20(3): Protects individuals from being compelled to self-incriminate, guarding against forced confessions.
• Article 21: Assures the right to life and personal liberty, which inherently prohibits torture and inhuman treatment.
• Article 22: Provides protections to individuals against arbitrary arrest and detention, which directly safeguards people from illegal or abusive custodial proceedings.
• Article 22(1)): The arrested individual has the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of their choice.
  • This ensures that detainees have legal support to prevent coercion, torture, or abuse during custodial proceedings.

Legal Provisions

• Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 120): Penalizes the infliction of hurt to extract confessions.
• Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 35): Mandates proper procedures and documentation during arrests.
• Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Section 22): Invalidates confessions obtained under coercion or inducement.

Judicial Precedents

• DK Basu vs. State of West Bengal (1997): Laid down guidelines like arrest memos, medical examinations, and the right to legal counsel to prevent custodial torture.State of U.P. vs. Ram Sagar Yadav (1985): In cases of custodial torture, the burden to prove innocence lies with the accused police officer.
• Nambi Narayanan Case (2018): Recognized the long-lasting psychological damage from custodial abuse and wrongful prosecution.

• National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Directions:
  • The NHRC mandates that custodial deaths must be reported within 24 hours to ensure prompt accountability.
  • Non-compliance is treated as an attempt to suppress the incident.

Persisting Challenges in Addressing Custodial Deaths

• Rising Numbers and Recurring Cases: Between 2016 and 2022, India reported over 11,600 custodial deaths, with Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh leading the list.
  • Incidents like the Sivaganga and Sattankulam cases show that such practices persist despite public outrage.
• Lack of Concrete Legal Action: India has signed but not ratified the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT).
  • There is no dedicated anti-torture law in India, and current penal provisions are fragmented and insufficient.
• Poor Accountability and Weak Enforcement: Out of hundreds of judicial inquiries into custodial deaths between 2017 and 2022, very few led to arrests, and convictions were virtually absent.
  • Victims, especially from marginalized communities, often fear retaliation and rarely get justice.
• Institutional Weaknesses:
  • Human Rights Commissions lack binding powers and rely on government funding.
  • Police Complaint Authorities are either absent or ineffective in many states.
  • Prison Overcrowding and a lack of independent supervision facilitate torture and abuse.
• Systemic and Judicial Failures: Long delays in court proceedings and poor witness protection prevent timely justice.
  • Failure to consistently follow the DK Basu Guidelines and conduct effective magisterial inquiries hampers accountability.

Way Forward

• Enact a Strong Anti-Torture Law: The Law Commission’s 273rd Report (2017) recommended a standalone Prevention of Torture Law and the ratification of UNCAT to criminalize torture explicitly and offer victim compensation.
• Institutional Reforms: Separate law enforcement from investigation to reduce the risk of abuse.
  • Establish independent police complaint authorities at the district level to investigate custodial violence impartially.
• Strengthen Monitoring Mechanisms: Ensure strict compliance with DK Basu Guidelines and judicial supervision of custodial procedures.
  • District Magistrates and Superintendents of Police must promptly report custodial deaths to the NHRC.
• Capacity Building: Train police personnel in human rights, ethical interrogation, and lawful detention practices.
  • Judicial magistrates should receive training to ensure fair remand processes.
• Promote Best Practices: Adopt measures from international models where effective independent agencies and quick disciplinary action against offenders have curbed custodial abuse.
• Fast-Track Justice: Establish dedicated fast-track courts to handle cases of custodial deaths and ensure time-bound investigations and trials.

Conclusion

Custodial torture and deaths are grave violations of human dignity that threaten the very foundations of constitutional democracy. Strong legal reforms, effective accountability mechanisms, and a cultural shift in policing are essential to end this pervasive menace. It is time for the law-keepers to uphold justice and protect, not violate, the rights of citizens.

DOWNLOAD PDF