Supreme Court Rulings On Custodial Deaths
1. D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997)
Background:
This is one of the most significant and landmark cases concerning custodial deaths and torture in India. It was filed in response to widespread reports of custodial violence and deaths.
Legal Issues:
Protection against custodial torture and death.
Guidelines to prevent custodial violence and ensure police accountability.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court laid down comprehensive “D.K. Basu Guidelines” to be strictly followed during arrest and detention:
Police must prepare a memo of arrest, signed by the arrested person and a witness.
The arrested person must be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours.
Police officer must inform a relative or friend of the arrested person.
Police custody records must be maintained.
Medical examination of the arrested person must be done at the time of arrest and during detention.
Significance:
The judgment aimed to prevent custodial torture and death by ensuring transparency and accountability. It is a cornerstone ruling for human rights in police custody.
2. People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. State of Maharashtra (2014)
Background:
This case dealt with the death of Sohrabuddin Sheikh in alleged fake encounter by police officers.
Legal Issues:
Accountability for custodial deaths.
Role of police and authorities in preventing fake encounters.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court reiterated that custodial deaths must be thoroughly investigated and that police officers involved in fake encounters and custodial killings must be prosecuted. The Court emphasized the need for strict adherence to procedural safeguards and the role of independent inquiries.
Significance:
The ruling reinforced zero tolerance towards custodial deaths and underscored the necessity of transparent investigations.
3. Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993)
Background:
Nilabati Behera, a mother, challenged the death of her son in police custody under suspicious circumstances.
Legal Issues:
Compensation and accountability for custodial death.
State responsibility towards custodial violence victims.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court awarded compensation to the deceased’s family, holding the state liable for custodial death. It recognized custodial death as a violation of the fundamental right to life under Article 21.
Significance:
This case was landmark in establishing the state’s liability and the principle of compensation for custodial deaths.
4. Joginder Kumar v. State of UP (1994)
Background:
This case involved the illegal and prolonged detention of an individual by police officers.
Legal Issues:
Protection against illegal detention.
Prevention of custodial torture and death.
Judgment:
The Court laid down guidelines on arrest and detention procedures, including the requirement to inform relatives and lawyers promptly. The judgment reinforced safeguards to prevent custodial torture and deaths.
Significance:
It strengthened the procedural safeguards from D.K. Basu and emphasized rights of detainees.
5. Arms Act Case (Kharak Singh v. State of UP, 1962)
Background:
Though primarily about police surveillance and privacy, this case touched upon the excessive powers of the police that sometimes lead to custodial violence.
Legal Issues:
Limits on police powers.
Protection against arbitrary police action.
Judgment:
The Court held that the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 includes protection from arbitrary police action, indirectly addressing custodial violence.
Significance:
It laid the constitutional foundation for later judgments on custodial deaths and police accountability.
Summary of Legal Principles from These Cases:
Custodial death is a violation of Article 21 (Right to Life) of the Constitution.
Police must strictly follow procedural safeguards during arrest and detention.
Arrested/detained persons must be produced before magistrates promptly.
Police must maintain transparency and keep records to avoid torture or death.
State is liable to compensate victims of custodial deaths.
Independent investigations and prosecutions are mandatory in custodial death cases.
Courts play a vital role in enforcing human rights protections against custodial abuse.
RELATED Blog
0 comments