Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Monday, November 25, 2024

No Blank Cheque For Custodial Torture Or Custodial Death

Posted in: Criminal Law
Wed, Jul 15, 20, 21:25, 4 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 3758
most unfortunate death of a father Jayaraj and son Benicks allegedly due to severe custodial torture in a police station near Thoothukudi at Kovilpatti sub jail in Tuticorin in Tamil Nadu

Let me begin by first and foremost penning that the most unfortunate death of a father Jayaraj and son Benicks allegedly due to severe custodial torture in a police station near Thoothukudi at Kovilpatti sub jail in Tuticorin in Tamil Nadu has raised serious questions on the conduct of the police and has shocked the entire nation! They were arrested for a seemingly trivial reason of violating lockdown norms in Sattankulam town in Tamil Nadu. It must be mentioned here that at the Kovilpatti sub jail when a medical check-up was done on the father and son, it came to light that there were serious injuries.

What is most shameful and most hurting to note is that when the check up of the son and the father revealed serious injuries and the duo were in an extremely bad condition, they were sent to jail instead of hospital! How can this be justified under any circumstances? As a corollary what followed next ostensibly was that their condition further deteriorated and it was then that they were sent very late to Kovilpatti general hospital where son Bennicks died on June 22 and his father Jayaraj died on June 23! There can be no blank cheque ever for custodial torture and custodial deaths

To be sure, it is most heartening to see that in the backdrop of the most horrifying custodial torture and death of a father and son as mentioned above, a writ petition has been filed as PIL just recently in the Supreme Court titled People's Charioteer Organization & Another Vs Union Of India & Others seeking elaborate guidelines from the top court to ensure prevention of custodial torture. This petition has been filed by People's Charioteer Organization (PCO) through its Secretary, Legal Cell, Mr Devesh Saxena, Advocate who lamented that, We failed to eliminate the colonial attitude of our police. This is mainly because they are rarely ever held accountable and rarely punished most strictly! This petition has been drawn by another advocate – Shashwat Anand.

To start with, it has been very rightly pointed out at the very outset in this petition that, The murderous police assault, unending beatings and brutal torture which caused the death of two innocent traders, a father and a son, Jayaraj, aged 62 years and Bennix, aged 32 years, at Sathankulam Police Station, near Thoothukudi in Tamil Nadu, has brought the issue of custodial deaths to the limelight and it is an acute demonstration of a broken criminal justice system and failure to effectively uphold legal protection against police abuse. Accusations have been made against the police officers involved in two F.I.Rs filed on 24.06.2020, and thereafter news coverage regarding the incident gained traction. Due to huge outcry, 4 policemen, two sub inspectors and two constables working at the Sathankulam Police Station were suspended, and the Inspector In-charge was transferred.

Furthermore, it has been also rightly pointed out that, This incident, inter alia, has traumatized all those who respect the rule of law and personal liberty in the country and it underlines afresh the urgent need for institutional correctives within the policing system in this country and the acute need for India to enact a strong law to prohibit and prosecute cases of torture and custodial deaths, in fulfillment of its legal obligations, both national and international, to guarantee protection to right to life.

It is quite baffling to see that till now there is no strong law that strongly prohibits custodial torture and custodial deaths and prescribes strongest punishment for those men in uniform who dare to indulge in custodial torture and custodial deaths under any circumstances! But certainly this does not mean that no law can ever be made now also just because in the past no attempt has been made in this direction! All that is needed is strong will to act in this direction and nothing else!

Bluntly put: Let me now ask few troubling questions which keep tormenting my mind. Why should custodial torture and custodial death not be prohibited, prosecuted and punished most severely? Why is there no zero tolerance for custodial torture and custodial deaths? Why instead do we see that there is zero conviction rate for custodial deaths and considerable delay in proceedings as we see in the annual report of 2017-18 of NHRC which received 148 intimations of death in police custody and 1636 intimations concerning deaths in judicial custody? Why should men in uniform not be held strictly accountable and strictly punished?

Also, it must be asked: When no law can ever under any circumstances sanction custodial torture then why are police given a blank cheque for custodial torture? Why are they not promptly arrested, held accountable and punished most severely so that no one can ever take law for granted? Why a criminal act perpetrated by a men in uniform not be sent behind bars and why those in uniform perpetrating custodial deaths be not sent to the gallows? Why men in uniform forget that uniform does not give them the unfettered right to indulge in mercilessly beating someone, then further torturing them and then not allowing them to be sent to hospital in time which ultimately ensures that they die while in custody?

It would be instructive for the police themselves to read some landmark judgments delivered by Supreme Court pertaining to this key issue. To start with, while explaining about the reason behind the poor rate of conviction, it is pointed out in State of M.P. v. Shyamsunder Trivedi 1995 4 SCC 262 that, ...rarely in cases of police torture or custodial death, direct ocular evidence of the complicity of the police personnel would be available. Generally speaking, it would be police officials alone who can only explain the circumstance in which a person in their custody had died. Bound as they are by the ties of brotherhood, it is not unknown that police personnel prefer to remain silent and more often than not pervert the truth to save their colleagues.

Going ahead, why can't the detailed guidelines that were laid down by the Supreme Court in Joginder Singh v. State of U.P. (1994) 4 SCC 260 and also in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416 be implemented in totality? We cannot be oblivious to what Justice AS Anand had famously stated in DK Basu's case that, Custodial torture is a naked violation of human dignity and degradation which destroys, to a large extent, the individual personality. It is a calculated assault on human dignity and whenever human dignity is wounded, civilization takes a step backward – flag of humanity must on each such occasion fly half-mast.

Interestingly enough, it is quite laudable that it is further very rightly and very commendably stated in this very DK Basu's case that, Custodial death is one of the worst crimes in a civilized society governed by Rule of Law. Does a citizen shed off his fundamental right to life, the moment a policeman arrests him? Can the right to life of a citizen be put in abeyance on his arrest? The answer, indeed, has to be an emphatic No.

It is quite unfortunate to see that till 2005 when amendments were carried out there were no provisions to deal with death, disappearance and rape in police custody. What is more unfortunate is that even after Section 176(1A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure which was inserted after the amendment of 2005, we see that the compliance with this mandatory provision which stipulates that in such cases, the Judicial Magistrate or the Metropolitan Magistrate, within whose local jurisdiction the offence has been committed shall hold an inquiry in addition to the inquiry or investigation held by the police, is rare and a long standing issue which is yet to be addressed, as a result of which this provision has become redundant in nature. All these loopholes must be plugged right now!

Also, it is a no-brainer that the landmark directions issued by the Supreme Court on police reforms in Prakash Singh v. Union of India 2006 8 SCC 1 must be implemented in totality. The governments should implement the police reforms by separating the investigating wing from the law and order branch. It also directed to establish a complaints authority to look into the human rights violations including custodial deaths and abuse of authority by the police.

Furthermore, in Prakash Kadam v. Ramprasad Vishwanath Gupta 2011 6 SCC 189, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that, Policemen are persons who are supposed to uphold the law. In our opinion, if crimes are committed by ordinary people, ordinary punishment should be given, but if the offence is committed by policemen, much harsher punishment should be given to them because they do an act totally contrary to their duties.

What's more, the Apex Court then laments in Re Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons v. State of Assam AIR 2016 SC 993 that, There are several such cases – documented and undocumented – all over the country but in spite of repeated decisions delivered by this Court and perhaps every High Court there seems to be no let-up in custodial deaths. This is not a sad but a tragic state of affairs indicating the apparent disdain of the State to the life and liberty of individuals, particularly those in custody. The time to remedy the situation is long past, and yet, there seems to be no will and therefore no solution in sight.

Why can't police be freed from political interference and political control? Why can't police recruitment be made more strict and why can't their service conditions be made further more strict? Why can't the Supreme Court directives on police reforms in Prakash Singh case of 2006 be strictly implemented?

Why can't police be made to follow the instructions given in the landmark DK Basu's case while arresting a person? Like, for instance: All officials must carry name tags and full identification, arrest memo must be prepared, containing all details regarding time and place of arrest, attested by one family member or respectable member of the locality. The location of arrest must be intimated to one family or next friend, details notified to the nearest legal aid organization and arrestee must be made known of each DK Basu right, all such compliances must be recorded in the police register, he must get periodical medical examination, inspection memo must be signed by arrestee also and all such information must be centralized in a central police control room. Why can't the archaic and colonial The Police Act, 1861 be amended to meet the present circumstances? Why can't the landmark recommendations of the Law Commission of India in its 152nd and 273rd report be implemented?

No doubt, the 152nd report submitted in 1994 had rightly recommended insertion of a new provision – Section 154A in Cr PC to enable any person to approach a judicial authority on the failure of police to register FIR! Similarly, the 273rd report of Law Commission of India on implementation of UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or punishment through legislation strongly recommended that those policemen who indulge in torture can be punished with imprisonment which may extend to life. Here I personally feel that custodial killing must be punished with death as they cannot be justified under any circumstances! Or at least, death penalty also must be included for custodial killings apart from life term so that a strong and stern message goes out that custodial killings won't be tolerated by a civilized society like India any longer!

On a more serious note: Why can't the police training be overhauled completely so that they are taught to be more humane, more responsive and more compassionate while dealing with people and human rights? Why can't the landmark recommendations of the Malimath Committee on Reforms in Criminal Justice System be implemented? Why can't the governments both at the Centre and in the States show more drive and determination to push through the necessary reforms as recommended by so many Committees and even Law Commission of India which have been just gathering dust till now?

In conclusion, only a strong political will is needed to do the same! There is nothing that cannot be done provided there is adequate political will! Custodial torture undermines the rule of law and erodes the people's faith in the system.

In addition, it many times makes a common man pick up guns to avenge with what he/she feels has been done wrongly! To restore people's faith many remedial steps have to be taken! They cannot be left in abeyance any longer now! The earlier the police reforms are carried into effect, the better it shall be for not just people but also for the police themselves!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top