The recent Delhi High Court ruling that upheld a 10-year sentence for five Uttar Pradesh policemen has brought the concept of custodial torture to the forefront. The policemen were convicted in 2019 for the custodial torture and subsequent death of a 26-year-old man in 2006. This article will explore the issue of custodial torture, its types, related constitutional provisions, international conventions, and the ethical arguments against it.
Understanding Custodial Torture
Custodial torture refers to the infliction of physical or mental pain on an individual in the custody of the police or other authorities. It’s a severe violation of human rights and dignity and often leads to what’s known as custodial deaths – deaths occurring while a person is in custody.
Different Types of Custodial Death
Deaths in custody can occur under varying circumstances. In Police Custody, deaths may result from excessive force, denial of medical care, or other forms of abuse. Death in Judicial Custody might stem from overcrowding, poor conditions, lack of medical facilities, inmate violence, or suicide. Deaths in the Custody of Army or Paramilitary Forces generally happen through torture, extrajudicial killings, or crossfire incidents.
Constitutional Provisions and International Conventions related to Custodial Torture
The Constitution of India protects its citizens from custodial torture through several Articles. Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which includes the right to be free from torture. Article 20(1) and 20(3) provide additional safeguards.
Various international conventions, like the International Human Rights Law, 1948, the United Nation Charter, 1945, and the Nelson Mandela Rules, 2015, also call for treating prisoners with dignity and prohibit torture.
Ethical Arguments Against Custodial Torture
Ethically, custodial torture violates human rights and dignity. Moreover, it undermines the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” and contradicts the very principles that law enforcement officers should uphold – justice, equality, and protection of human rights. Additionally, it often targets vulnerable individuals such as suspects, detainees, or prisoners, unjustly inflicting more harm on those who are already marginalized.
Strengthening Legal Systems to Prevent Custodial Torture
Addressing custodial torture involves strengthening legal systems, enacting comprehensive legislation that criminalizes such actions, ensuring prompt and impartial investigations, and focusing on police reforms. Training programs must emphasize the protection of human rights, professionalism, and empathy.
Oversight mechanisms must be established to monitor and address instances of custodial torture effectively. Civil society and human rights organizations can play a crucial role in advocating for victims, providing support and legal assistance, and collaborating with international bodies for redress and justice.
Examining Custody Details Through UPSC Civil Services Examination Questions
A question from the 2020 UPSC Civil Services Examination provides insight into the differentiation between judicial and police custody. In judicial custody, an accused is in the custody of the Magistrate and lodged in jail, while in police custody, the accused is locked up in a police station. During judicial custody, police officers need prior permission from the magistrate to interrogate the suspect. The question serves as a stark reminder of the procedural intricacies involved in cases of custody.