Custodial Deaths in India

The Constitution of India guarantees various rights to a ‘prisoner’ or ‘person in custody’, under Article 20, 21 and 22 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court of India has interpreted certain rights such as ‘Right against Inhuman Treatment by the police’, ‘Right against handcuffing’, ‘Right to a fair and speedy trial’, ‘Right to free legal aid’, etc. to be an integral part of Article 21 of the Constitution. The custodial death refers to the death of a person, who is in the custody of the police or other law enforcement agencies. These deaths can occur during interrogation, detention, or while in prison custody. Custodial deaths are a serious issue in India because they often involve violations of human rights and excess use of power by law enforcement officials.

Custodial deaths are a grave issue in India, and violations of human rights are often cited in connection with such incidents. According to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India, there were 1,731 reported cases of custodial deaths in India between 2015 and 2019. Uttar Pradesh topped the list of states and Union Territories (UTs) with the highest number of custodial deaths during this period, with 401 reported cases.

Some of the notable cases of custody deaths are as under:

2 December 1987: The custodial death of Suman Behera. The police arrested Suman Behera of Sundargarh, Orissa on 1 December 1987. The dead body of Suman Behera was found on nearby train tracks on 2 December 1987. The mother of the victim, Nilabati Behera, sued the state of Orissa. In its verdict on 23 March 1993 in the case of Nilabati Behera vs. State of Orissa, the Supreme Court of India ordered the state to pay the mother a compensation of Rs.150,000, setting a precedent of compensation to the victims' families.

27 September 2005: The custodial death of Udayakumar. Three Thiruvanathapuram policemen had arrested Udayakumar on suspicion of theft and then killed him. On 23 July 2018, CBI special court found two of the officers guilty and sentenced them to death. One of the accused policemen died during the trial.

21 June 2019: The custodial death of K. Rajkumar. A 49-year-old man named K. Rajkumar was taken into custody by Nedumkandam police in a financial crime case on 12 June 2019. On 16 June 2019, he was presented before a magistrate. He died on 21 June 2021 after being tortured in custody.

23 June 2020: The custodial death of P. Jeyaraj and his son Bennicks, who were arrested by Sathakulam police on 19 June 2020 for allegedly keeping their cellphone store open past the Covid-19 lockdown timings. They were tortured in custody. Bennicks died on 22 June 2020 and P. Jeyaraj on 23 June 2020.

The Constitution of India provides for the protection of fundamental rights, which include the right to life and personal liberty. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) also has several provisions relating to custodial deaths, such as Section 330 (voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession), Section 331 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt to extort confession), and Section 342 (wrongful confinement). The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 also safeguards against custodial violence, torture, and deaths.

The NHRC, as well as the state Human Rights Commissions, play an essential role in investigating and addressing custodial deaths in India. However, more needs to be done to prevent such incidents from happening in the first place, including improvements in police training and accountability.

The problem of custodial death in India is widespread, and as mentioned earlier, according to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), there were 1,731 reported cases of custodial deaths in India between 2015 and 2019. These deaths are often accompanied by allegations of police brutality, torture, or other forms of abuse. Apart from the loss of innocent lives and the violation of human rights, custodial deaths also erode public trust in the criminal justice system.

Stand of High Courts and Supreme Courts in such cases has been quite strict in the recent times. The courts have held that the custodial violence or death is a crime against humanity and a violation of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. To deter such incidents, the courts have imposed harsh punishment on police personnel found guilty in such cases and have also ordered compensation to families of the deceased.

The courts have also made specific guidelines for police personnel to follow while interrogating or detaining individuals. Recently, the Supreme Court of India has also laid down guidelines for mandatory video-recording of the interrogations in all cases of a heinous nature. This is to ensure the transparency and to create evidence for any allegations of misconduct or abuse.

The issue of custodial death in India is a significant cause of concern and requires a concerted effort by law enforcement agencies, governments, and the judiciary to address. The courts have played a crucial role in providing justice to the victims and their families, but more needs to be done to prevent such incidents from happening in the first place.