Answer

Introduction

Custodial violence refers to abuse/torture by police in custody, violating Article 21 despite safeguards in the D.K. Basu case (1997). NCRB reports persistent custodial deaths annually, indicating weak compliance. The Sathankulam (Jayaraj–Benicks) case exposed brutal torture, fake charges, and systemic complicity, despite clear guidelines.

Body

Structural Causes

• Colonial Legacy: Policing remains control-oriented under the Police Act, 1861, prioritising authority over citizen service.
  Eg: Force-centric conduct visible in the Sattankulam custodial violence case.
• Impunity Culture: Weak accountability mechanisms embolden misuse of power by officials.
  Eg: Attempts to destroy evidence in Sattankulam case reflect lack of fear of punishment.
• Code of Silence: Informal “blue wall” discourages officers from reporting misconduct.
• Violence Normalisation: Custodial torture seen as a routine tool for investigation.
  Eg: Brutal overnight assault used to extract compliance from victims.
• Power Asymmetry: Socio-economically weak citizens lack capacity to resist abuse.
  Eg: Small traders in lockdown falsely charged without immediate legal recourse.

Institutional Failures

• Medical Complicity: Doctors fail to independently document custodial injuries.
  Eg: “Fit for remand” certification despite visible torture marks.
• Judicial Apathy: Magistrates often approve remand mechanically without scrutiny.
  Eg: Victims remanded despite clear physical signs of abuse.
• Self-Investigation: Police probe their own misconduct, undermining fairness.
  Eg: Initial suppression of evidence before CBI intervention.
• Weak Forensics: Poor evidence protection enables tampering and delays.
  Eg: High Court intervention required to secure critical evidence.
• Witness Insecurity: Lack of protection deters truthful testimonies.

Way Forward

• Strict Enforcement: Enforce safeguards of D.K. Basu vs State of West Bengal with penal consequences.
  Eg: Mandatory arrest memo, medical checks, and family intimation.
• Independent Oversight: Establish Police Complaints Authorities for external accountability.
  Eg: Directed in Prakash Singh vs Union of India.
• CCTV Monitoring: Ensure real-time surveillance in all custody areas.
  Eg: Supreme Court mandate for CCTV installation in police stations.
• Functional Separation: Separate investigation from law & order duties to reduce coercive practices.
• Police Sensitisation: Train personnel in human rights and scientific investigation.
  Eg: Increased reliance on forensics instead of third-degree methods.

Conclusion

“Custodial torture is worse than terrorism” — V.R. Krishna Iyer. Custodial violence persists not due to lack of laws but failure of enforcement and accountability. Upholding Article 21 requires institutional transformation—independent oversight, strict compliance with D.K. Basu vs State of West Bengal, and citizen-centric policing to ensure justice, dignity, and trust in the rule of law.

DOWNLOAD PDF