.jpg)
Subhra Dan
Adamas University, Kolkata
Among several other cases, the Supreme Court of India has resolved one landmark case relating to the life and dignity of people who are behind bars. The inhuman tortures and the limitless brutality of the Police are sometimes carried away to the death of the inmates. The torch bearer or ‘the Beacon’ who stood to fetch justice for those detainees and protect their fundamental right of ‘right to life’ is the one and only DK Basu.
Background of the case
A PIL (public interest litigation) was filed in the Supreme Court of India to abolish the practice of custodial torture and intense brutality of the Police in detention centres. The PIL exclusively highlighted the infringement of the fundamental right to life of the inmates in police custody. According to the petitioner, the fundamental right of right to life cannot be curbed if someone is in prison. The criminal jurisprudence emphasizes that a person under trial cannot be assumed guilty until convicted by a court of law. The inhuman torture in police custody hampers the physical, mental, sexual, and social life of a detainee. On 26th August 1986, the chairman of Legal Aid Services of West Bengal wrote to the then Chief Justice of India based on custodial brutality and its severe impact on the pre-trial and under-trial detainees.
Issues Arose
Petitioner DK Basu raised several issues in the Apex Court of India to combat the infringement of the fundamental rights of the detainees.
1. Whether the respective Police officer be held responsible for the deaths of the inmates in custody?
2. Whether custodial deaths are treated as a violation of Article 21 or the right to life and dignity of the detainees?
3. Whether there is an urgent of guiding principles to combat custodial brutality?
4. Whether there is an escalation in the rate of custodial deaths.
The Petitioner and the Respondent submitted their arguments in the Apex Court of India.
According to the Petitioner-
The excessive use of physical force and intense brutality for speedy confession is a naked violation of human rights and these adversely affect the fundamental rights of the pre-trial and under-trial detainees. The third-degree torture of the police is inhuman and it violates the basic rights and hampers the dignity of the individuals who are arrested and kept behind bars.
Violences are not only limited to physical torture but also the intensity extends up to social-psychological-sexual torture. The use of power and intense force on the detainees is absolutely an arbitrariness and ultra virus of the police.
The inmates become mentally weak which severely affects their normal living and socialization. The mal-treatment and the severe inhuman tortures in the detention centres within the four walls were presented by the petitioner.
The council for Respondent submitted that-
The Respondent underlined the crucial importance of the procedures that are followed in the custody by the Police solely for the proper implementation of laws. The state has already engaged itself in framing laws to regulate custodial violence. Also, steps to regulate the activities of the police personnel have been adopted by the state authority. The responsibilities, roles and specific duties of the police officer have been discussed by the state and certain severe measures would be adopted by the state to counter the arbitrariness of the police officers who practice brutality on accused or suspected detainees. The state highlighted the lack of proper training and other problems that affected the execution of proper systematic ways of interrogation in custody. The inadequate resources and the intense workload on the police department were underlined to counter the Petitioner’s contentions.
Judgement by the Apex Court of India
The division bench of the Apex Court consisting of Kuldip Singh, J. and Justice A.S. Anand had taken landmark steps to resolve the issues related to custodial brutality in the detention centres. The first step was that they framed a set of eleven guiding principles to modify the procedural system that is followed and secondly, they tried to set a bar of compensation to the victims of severe custodial torture. The Court observed that the inmates have the right to exercise the fundamental right of life and liberty. The presence of a person behind bars does not curb his/her fundamental rights which are enshrined in the Constitution of India.
The guiding principles for the modification of the procedural laws are-
i. The police officer while arresting a person, should be in proper uniform along with proper identity records. The officers who will conduct the interrogations must maintain a register.
ii. An arrest memo should be prepared by the police and there should be a signature of any witness who is known to the detainee.
iii. The arrested person enjoys a right to inform regarding his/her arrest to his/her closed one(s).
iv. A thorough medical examination of the detainee is to be conducted and all the injuries of the detainee are to be recorded in a register.
v. The arrested individual can be allowed to meet the legal representatives during the process of interrogation.
vi. A police control room in all the districts is to be set up who control the records related to arrest and place of arrest of the accused or the suspected individuals.
Besides these, the court emphasized that the constitution provides provisions that allow the detainees to gather information regarding the grounds of arrest and the right to defend them with the help of a legal practitioner. The third-degree method was extremely criticized by the bench. The court held that the state is vicariously liable for the loss of the victims and the state has the sole duty to compensate the victims of heinous custodial brutality or torture.
Analysis and the Impact of the Verdict
The judgment of this case is critically analysed by the jurists and lawmakers of India. The judgment made by the division bench of the Supreme Court of India has gained several appreciations along with numerous drawbacks in the past few decades. India is a nation that has favoured the common law system, so the precedents made by the Apex Court have always gained severe importance in the judicial system of India. The set of eleven guidelines has always safeguarded the rights of citizens by restricting and confining the independent moves of the Police. Also, the judgement underlined the brutality of custodial violence and its adverse effect on the socio-psycho-sexual and physical health of the inmates. The court’s verdict raised awareness among people about custodial tortures. The verdict paved the way to closely scrutinize the actions of police officers when they are dealing with inmates regardless of their conviction.
However, some shining issues have been highlighted by the jurists in the judgement of this case. The criminal justice system is a very long-term procedure. So, sometimes the guidelines are not specifically followed or scrutinized by the police or the authorities. Secondly, the inmates are not aware of their rights and privileges, hence they are hardly capable of tracing the misconduct that happens to them that breaches their dignity.
Summarizing the case
The case of DK Basu v. State of West Bengal is a landmark case in the history of India as this case solely prioritizes the rights and dignity of humans overall. Just a person behind bars does not curb his/her human rights or especially some of the fundamental rights that are enshrined in the Constitution. The Right to life and personal liberty was interpreted by the Apex Court in this mentioned case which broadened the prospect of the fundamental right that safeguards the dignity of an individual. The guidelines framed by the Hon’ble Court emphasized the legislative to amend the procedure codes so that detainees (pre-trial and under-trial) can fully shelter themselves under the umbrella of fundamental rights. Also, the inhuman torture and arbitrary actions taken by the police or other personnel can be regulated by the suggested guidelines of the Hon’ble Bench. Notwithstanding anything, the case mentioned has helped to reduce custodial deaths, custodial violence and other incidents that occur inside the prisons of India.
Conclusion
The severe brutality of the police including the third-degree torture was highly criticized by the division bench of the Apex Court. The landmark judgment of the discussed case paved the way to establish the rights of the detainees and the judgment highlighted eleven precious guidelines to safeguard the rights of the citizens. After the case of DK Basu v. State of West Bengal, several cases related to custodial brutality including custodial rape have been filed in the Apex as well as respective High Courts. This has reduced and de-escalated the rate of custodial torture in prisons in India but the situation has not yet been abolished. The practice of severe torture in police custody is still prevalent in several areas of the nation which are to be abolished. Several reports and surveys have highlighted the problems related to the training of police, their workload and other complications that fan the problem of custodial torture either directly or indirectly. But to establish human rights and to emphasize the importance of fundamental rights that are enshrined in the Constitution without any sort of discrimination, the discussed case is of utmost importance. The golden principles that were given in this case were later incorporated in the CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) of 1973 after the amendment of 2008.
References-
i. INDIAN KANOON, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/501198/ (last visited Jan.15, 2025).
ii. DISTRICTCOURTOFINDIA, https://districts.ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/circular16092015.pdf (last visited Jan 15. 2025).
iii. D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal,1997 (1) SCC 416.
Comments