After Reading This Article You Can Solve This UPSC Mains Model Questions:
Custodial violence is a relic of colonial policing that continues to undermine the constitutional morality of modern India. In light of recent judicial developments, discuss the systemic challenges in eradicating custodial torture and suggest comprehensive reforms to transition from ‘force-based’ to ‘rights-based’ policing. 15 Marks (GS-2, Polity)
Context
The recent conviction in the Sattankulam Custodial Death Case, where multiple police personnel were held guilty based on strong forensic and testimonial evidence, marks a significant moment of judicial accountability. It not only exposes deep-rooted systemic failures in policing and oversight but also reinforces the role of the judiciary in upholding constitutional rights and deterring abuse of authority.
What is Custodial Violence?
Custodial violence refers to any form of physical or psychological harm inflicted upon a person under police or judicial custody. It includes:
- Physical torture such as beatings and assault
- Psychological abuse including intimidation and humiliation
- Sexual violence
- Custodial deaths
Such practices are often justified by erring officials as necessary for extracting confessions or maintaining discipline, despite being illegal and violative of fundamental rights.
Historical Background
Custodial violence in India is deeply rooted in its historical evolution, reflecting continuity rather than rupture across different eras.
1. Ancient India
Texts like the Arthashastra by Kautilya describe severe punitive measures such as mutilation, burning, and even execution through animal attacks. Punishment was often deterrent-oriented, with limited concern for individual rights.
2. Medieval Period
During the Mughal era, justice was influenced by Islamic jurisprudence (Shariat law). Corporal punishments, including flogging and physical coercion, were commonly used as tools of enforcement, reflecting a continuation of harsh penal practices.
3. British Colonial Period
The colonial state institutionalised coercive policing:
- The Police Act of 1861 created a force designed primarily for repression and control, not public service.
- Political prisoners and ordinary detainees were frequently subjected to beatings, starvation, and brutal punishments.
- The Prisons Act of 1894 granted wide discretionary powers to jail authorities, many of which continue to shape prison administration today.
This period entrenched a culture of authority without accountability.
4. Post-Independence Period
After 1947, India largely retained its colonial policing and prison structures:
- Limited reforms in policing and prison administration
- Persistence of coercive and hierarchical mindset
- Weak accountability mechanisms and outdated laws
Despite constitutional guarantees, custodial violence continued due to systemic inertia and lack of institutional modernization.
Legal and Constitutional Safeguards
1. Constitutional Provisions
- Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty
- Article 20(3): Protection against self-incrimination
- Article 22: Safeguards against arbitrary arrest
2. Judicial Safeguards
- D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal: Guidelines for arrest and detention
- Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa: Compensation jurisprudence
3. Statutory Safeguards
- IPC provisions on assault and homicide
- CrPC safeguards during arrest
- Evidence Act invalidating coerced confessions
Consequences of Custodial Violence
1. Human Rights Violations
Custodial violence directly violates fundamental rights like life, dignity, and protection from torture guaranteed under the Constitution.
It reflects a failure of the state to uphold basic human values and constitutional morality.
2. Erosion of Trust
When police misuse power, people begin to fear law enforcement instead of trusting it for protection.
This weakens public faith in both the police and the judiciary, harming the justice delivery system.
3. Miscarriage of Justice
Torture often forces accused persons to give false confessions just to escape pain.
This can lead to innocent people being punished while the real culprits remain free.
4. International Image
Frequent cases of custodial violence damage India’s reputation as a democratic nation committed to human rights.
It raises concerns globally, especially in relation to commitments under the United Nations Convention Against Torture.
Challenges in Addressing Custodial Violence
1. Poor Implementation of Reforms
Despite clear directions in Prakash Singh v. Union of India, many states have not fully implemented police reforms.
This leads to continued political interference and lack of accountability in policing.
2. Lack of Training and Forensic Capacity
Police often rely on outdated interrogation methods due to inadequate training in scientific investigation techniques.
Limited forensic infrastructure further encourages dependence on coercion rather than evidence-based policing.
3. Weak Enforcement of Safeguards like CCTV
Although courts have mandated CCTV installation in police stations, implementation remains incomplete or ineffective.
This reduces transparency and makes it difficult to monitor or prove instances of custodial abuse.
4. Judicial Delays and Witness Intimidation
Slow legal processes delay justice, weakening deterrence against custodial violence.
Victims and witnesses often face threats, discouraging them from testifying and weakening prosecution cases.
Global Perspective on Custodial Violence
1. International Norms set by the United Nations
The UN has developed global human rights standards to prevent torture and protect individuals in custody.
Many countries align their domestic laws with these norms to ensure humane treatment of detainees.
2. United Nations Convention Against Torture Framework
UNCAT provides a legal framework to prohibit torture and mandates strict punishment for offenders.
Countries like United Kingdom and France have incorporated anti-torture provisions into their legal systems in line with UNCAT.
3. Practices in Developed Democracies
Developed nations focus on accountability, transparency, and technology in policing:
- United States: Use of body cameras, Miranda rights, and strong judicial oversight to prevent coercion.
- United Kingdom: Independent bodies like the Independent Office for Police Conduct investigate police misconduct.
- Japan: Emphasis on confession regulation, video recording of interrogations, and strict procedural safeguards.
Way Forward
1. Police Reforms: Implement reforms from Prakash Singh v. Union of India to reduce political interference. Separating investigation from law-and-order duties ensures professionalism and accountability.
2. Legal Reforms: A dedicated anti-torture law will clearly define and punish custodial violence. Ratifying the United Nations Convention Against Torture will align India with global standards.
3. Technological Measures: CCTV and body cameras increase transparency and act as deterrents against abuse. They also provide reliable evidence in case of allegations.
4. Strengthening Oversight: Independent complaints authorities can ensure impartial investigation of police misconduct. Empowering bodies like the National Human Rights Commission improve accountability.
5. Judicial Vigilance: Courts must carefully scrutinise arrests and remand procedures to prevent abuse. Strict action against negligent officials will strengthen deterrence.
6. Capacity Building: Training in scientific investigation reduces reliance on coercion.
Human rights sensitisation promotes ethical policing practices.
7. Community Policing: Building trust between police and citizens improves cooperation and transparency. It shifts policing from a force-based approach to a service-oriented one.
Conclusion
Custodial violence is not merely a breakdown of law enforcement but a deeper crisis of constitutional morality, where the State risks turning from protector to violator of rights. The Sattankulam Custodial Death Case shows that accountability is possible when institutions act with courage and integrity, but such moments must become the norm rather than exceptions.
India must shift to a humane, rights-based policing model where power is restrained, transparency is ensured, and dignity and justice are truly upheld.
