ABSTRACT
The term custodial cruelty is virtually a world-wide phenomenon inflicted upon individuals regardless of gender , age, or state of health .This worst form of human rights violation has become a very serious and alarming problem in India. Brutal atrocities on accused persons are on the increase day by day. Custodial cruelty has become so common these days that not only the police but even the people take it for granted as a routine police practice of interrogation.
Key words
Custodial cruelty, Historical perspective, International framework, Section 120 (BNS), Section 22(BSA),Section 35(BNSS)
Research methodology
This paper is primarily based on the analysis of existing legal provisions, constitutional framework and judicial pronouncements related to the problem of custodial cruelty. Secondary sources of information such as research articles ,government agencies reports, journals , newspapers and websites are used for research.
Aim of Study
The main concern of this study is to highlight the problem of custodial brutality in India and to raise awareness among law enforcement agencies so that the rights of the person in custody can be protected.
INTRODUCTION
Custodial cruelty refers to the perpetration of physical or mental suffering on a person who is in the police or judicial authorities. It includes numerous types of cruelty or torture which is done in order to bring out some information or forcefully making a person to confess the offense. The term custodial torture has not been defined under any law. It is an amalgamation of two words “custody” and “cruelty”. According to the Oxford English Dictionary the word “custody” means the protective care or guardianship of someone or something. As per Merriam-Webster Dictionary, custody is immediate charge and control exercised by a person or an authority. “Custodial Cruelty including torture and death in the lock-ups, strikes a blow at the rule of law, which demands that the powers of the executive should not only be derived from law but also that the same should be limited by law. Custodial cruelty is a matter of concern. It is aggravated by the fact that it is committed by persons who are supposed to be the protectors of the citizens.It is committed under the shield of uniform and authority in the four walls of a police station or lock-up, the victim being totally helpless. The protection of an individual from torture ab abuse by the police and other law enforcing officers is a matter of deep concern in a free society”.[DK Basu v. State of Bengal (1991) 1 SCC 416]
Custodial cruelty is a any kind of torture or violence attributed in the custody be it legal or not, which is not sanctioned by the law. Violation may be minute or extreme for example abusing , emotional or physical cruelty , beating , rape or even death. The nature of custody can be judicial, police, or custody taken by institutions which are obliged to take care of the occupant like hospital, homes etc. During interrogation by police the suspects are subjected to merciless beating with lathis, rifles, butts, and whips. Many are kicked, trampled, and kicked on the ground. A few are even stripped and electric shocks are applied to their body, including their Private parts. Hairs are pulled out. The interrogation room of the police station becomes no less than a virtual hell filled with screams. The torture becomes an independent tool for creating terror in the mind of persons. Torture has been defined in the UN Convention (1984) as “ any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third persons has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity”.
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF CUSTODIAL CRUELTY
The history of custodial cruelty in India is not just a tale of the past, it is a mirror reflecting the origin of a legal system that once placed divine justice above human rights.
During Ancient Period – In this period brutal methods of torture like cutting body parts, burning, whipping and animal attacks were used by law enforcement. These methods were also described in scriptures like the Rigveda and Smritis.
During Medieval Period – The legal system in medieval India resembles ancient India. In the Mughal Era the law of crime was the law of the land for the administration of criminal justice. Muslim law categorized crimes and punishment into Hadd, Quias, Diyat and Tazir.
Quias which means retaliation in kind. Eye for an eye or retributive justice. If someone kills another then the victim’s family has the right to demand the life of an accused person and if there were only physical injuries the victim can seek similar injuries to the offender. Diya or Diyut meant blood money. It is a form of financial compensation given to the victim’s family. Tazir refers to discretionary crimes and their punishment is left to the discretion of the qadi (judge). Hadd punishments were harsh-amputations and flogging intended to deter serious crimes. Imprisonment was also common under the Mughals Era with forts like Gwalior and Rohtas used as prisons. Some reforms were also made by the rulers promoted justice and humane treatment but despite some efforts at reform custodial torture, arbitrary detention, brutal punishment such as mutilation, impalement etc were remained prevalent throughout the Mughal Era.
During Modern India – After the fall of the Mughal Empire , the Britishers established their kingdom. But even during their regime the severe and barbarous treatments of punishment were not uncommon. British government considered custodial torture legitimate to maintain. During the British Period, the Britishers brought order from chaos and ended barbaric social customs, also built the judiciary, the police, jail and codified laws for their own benefits and convenience. The police were agents of imperial brutality, wherein people were tortured in order to obtain a confession for the crimes committed and the police system worked with an aim to create a sense of fear in the general public. After Independence several Police Commissions were appointed by the Union and state governments to look into the performance and methods of working of the State police during the 1950s, 1960s, the early 1970s and 1980s. Almost all these committees and Commission have revealed the tale of third degree or torture in police custody due to political ends, practice of corruption and lack of Infrastructure supports of scientific aids and training etc.
CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
After India gained independence the Indian constitution provided fundamental rights to protect citizens against state atrocities. Article 14 which provides equality before law- Under this article accused shall be treated as equal as other persons before law. This is the duty of the state to implement it and it shall not deny to any person equality before law. Article 19 protection of rights regarding speech and expression etc. Here the authorities’ guards of laws suspended their freedom of speech.
Article 20 which provides protection against self- incrimination. Article 21 that is right to life and personal liberty, protection from torture is recognized as a fundamental rights under this article. Article 21 of the constitution which reads that ; no person should be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. Article 22 protection against illegal arrest and detention are the primary safeguard for the citizens. No arrested person shall be detained in custody without being informed as soon as may be of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be denied the right to consult and to be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK
Under section 120 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2023) replacing IPC 1860 – It deals with the offense of voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt to extort a confession or to compel restoration of property. It outlines punishments for individuals who intentionally inflict harm on another person with the aim of extracting a confession, information related to an offense,or to force the return of property or satisfy a claim.
• Section 22 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam replacing (IEA 1872) – It invalidates confession made by inducement , threat ,coercion or promise. It deals with the relevancy of confessions in criminal proceedings. A confession made by an accused person is considered irrelevant if the court believes it was obtained due to an inducement, threat, coercion or promise. The inducement, threat, coercion or promise must come from a person who is in authority.
• Section 35 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita replacing (CRPC 1973)-It mandates that arrests and detention follow valid reasons, documented, procedures. It outlines the conditions under which a police officer can make such an arrest, primarily when a cognizable offense is committed in their presence or when there is a reasonable belief, based on credible information or suspicion that a cognizable offense has been committed.
INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK
International Human Rights Law 1948- It contains provisions that protects people from torture and other enforced disappearance. United Nations Charter 1945- It states that prisoners must be treated with dignity despite being prisoners their fundamental freedom and human rights are set out in the universal declaration of human rights. Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 reads “ No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Within the United Nations framework, torture and other cruel , inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are explicitly prohibited under a number of international treaties, which are legally binding on those states which have ratified them.
United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) – It obligates state to prevent torture and ensure justice. India is a signatory to the UNCAT.
CAUSES OF CUSTODIAL CRUELTY IN INDIA
Custodial cruelty in India stems from a range of system, legal , and social issues. Most common causes are –
Absence of strict provisions- Custodial cruelty has not been yet criminalised in India due to which legal vacuum allows those in power to torture the people over the past many decades without any accountability. It is important that strict and mandatory laws are passed in order to stop custodial cruelty. In our country custodial cruelty is yet to be criminalised and an unfair benefit of which has been taken by those in power over the past many decades.
Work pressure on police officers- Police Personnel work under pressure and tight deadlines to solve the case and for the quick solution they choose violence to extract confession or evidence. In our justice system an accused is presumed to be innocent until and unless he is proven guilty for the commission of an offence, beyond reasonable doubts and proving an accused guilty requires evidence against him, which they must collect against the accused. They are under a lot of stress as they have to handle a lot of cases at the same moment and also under the pressure to finish a certain volume of cases within a particular time frame.
Societal and cultural factors- The mindset of “ an eye for an eye” promotes the use of violence to get out information from the person accused of a crime. Some officials believe that punishing the criminals is the only way through which the criminals can be prevented from committing more crimes. Most of them believe in the efficacy of third degree treatments while dealing with criminals particularly those who have committed heinous crimes the thinking behind is that they deserve the torture.
IMPACT OF CUSTODIAL CRUELTY-
Custodial cruelty leaves a profound and lasting impact not only on victims but on their families also. Its consequences manifest in multiple dimensions- Physical, Psychological, Economic, and Social- each compounding the other and creating a cycle of trauma and marginalization.
- Physical impact– The physical impact of custodial brutality is often the most visible. Victims may suffer from severe bodily injuries including bruises, fractures, internal bleeding etc. In some instances the injuries may lead to long term or permanent disability, which limits the individual’s ability to perform daily activities. The inability to work not only affects the victims’ livelihood but also pushes the entire family into economic hardship.
- Psychological impact- The psychological impact which is less visible is equally damaging. Victims frequently suffer depression, anxiety, and severe emotional distress. The psychological burden not only disrupts the personal life of the victim but also affects their interpersonal relationships and societal participation.
- Economic impact- Custodial cruelty imposes a heavy financial burden on Victims and their families. Legal proceedings, medical treatments and rehabilitation involve considerable expenses. Many are forced to take loans or sell personal assets to fund their legal defenses or file complaints against police misconduct. It is a secondary trauma for marginalized families who are already dealing with pain.
- Social impact- The social impact associated with custodial cruelty further increases the victims suffering and pain.They are labelled as a criminals by society due to their involvement in police proceedings. The sense of betrayal by society leads victims and their families to withdraw from social life which increases their psychological distress.
RECENT INSTANCES OF CUSTODIAL CRUELTY-
Custodial brutality persists despite statutory safeguards and Supreme Court guidelines; this reflects a lack of political will to implement the laws. The recent custodial death of Ajith Kumar a 27- year old temple guard in Tamil Nadu. He was arrested under suspicion of theft and died in police custody after allegedly being torture. Between 2021 and 2025 there have been a series of custodial deaths. As per National Crimes Record Bureau (NCRB) data an average of 92 custodial deaths in police custody occurred annually Between 2000 and 2022. On the other hand Between 2010 – 11 and 2021 – 22 the National Human Right Commission (NHRC) registered an average of over 1700 custodial death related cases each year.
LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS ASSOCIATE WITH CUSTODIAL DEATH-
• Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P and Others AIR 1349, 1994 SCC (4) 260 – In this case the SC observed that the rights under Article 21 and 22(1) of the constitution need to be recognised and must be protected. Key guidelines issued by the court –
- The arrested person should be informed about their rights by the police officer.
- A record must be kept of who was informed about the arrest.
- The Magistrate shall determine that all legal procedures are followed.
- Article 21 and 22(1) must be strictly enforced.
This judgment strengthened procedural safeguards and aims to protect individual rights during arrest.
• J.Prabhavathiamma v. State of kerala (2007) 4 ILR ( ker) 201 : (2008) 1 KLJ: (2008) 1RCR (criminal) 778– In this case CBI court sentenced two police officers to death after a decade-long trial for custodial death of a scrap metal worker in Thiruvananthapuram. Justice Nazar condemned the brutal act stressing that such crimes harm public trust in the police. The death sentence set a strong precedent to deter future custodial cruelty.
• Yashwant and Others v. State of Maharashtra 2018 (2) S.C. Cr. R. 1223 – In this case nine police officers were convicted for a 1993 custodial death. The court held them guilty under IPC. Section 330 for using torture to extract a confession. Its sets accountability and precedent for strict action in human rights violations.
SOLUTION –
The National Human Rights Commission in collaboration with Penal Reform and Justice Administration (PRAJA) organized a two day seminar on Custodial cruelty in March 2006. The main recommendations that emanated from the seminar after the deliberation were placed under two heads by the commission , one relating to police set up and other relating to prisons.
• Police Set- Up
The custodial violation including deaths and torture occurred during investigation to extract information.
NHRC urges scientific and humane methods should be used in custody and faster investigation process following the guidelines issued in D.K Basu case.
Scientific tools and trained interrogation are essential to avoid torture and human right violation.
There is a strong need to bifurcate the police Personnel into two separate wings : one relating to investigation and other for law and order duties. Personnel should be trained to specialize in investigation procedures that will help in speedy disposal of the cases.
• Prisons
NHRC has observed a rise in undertrial prisoners and has recommended an urgent review of the undertrial prisoners for not only for setting free the prisoners who have undergone their terms of imprisonment but also for decongesting the prison.
Judges should consider bail seriously to prevent unnecessary custody ,trials must be expedited.
Custodial cruelty is preventable and that it is the responsibility of the State to protect the rights of people in custody. It is a serious issue that highlights the need for systemic criminal law reforms and its implementation by law enforcement agencies for better protection of individuals rights.
Others Solutions –
- Proper Education and training- The current situation necessitates a shift in police selection, focusing on root causes, personality traits, promoting law abiding behaviour and dispelling the notion of police as punishment seekers.
- Use of Scientific methods for investigation- Custodial cruelty often occurs when police officers resort to torture to extract confession. To address this issue the Police Act should be amended to shift the status of police from torturers to protectors of citizens rights. Scientific methods for investigation should be used to prevent violence, as overburdened officials may delegate work to untrained subordinates.
- Adequate Protective measures during arrest- The Apex Court’s guidelines emphasize the importance of protective measures during arrest. Police officer should inform the accused , inform family members, record arrest in the prescribed form, and conduct proper medical examinations. They should follow the DK Basu judgment guidelines and regularly check CCTV cameras to prevent atrocities.
- Establishing a transparent prison system- India’s prison system needs reform to ensure transparency and accountability. Regular visits by authorities and implementation of judicial guidelines are necessary to prevent force, abuse and cruelty against accused.
CONCLUSION-
India has a high rate of incarcerated deaths. It is the most heinous crime committed against our society since it is perpetrated by our saviour whom we trust and rely on for our safety. Its hard to admit the fact that the individual who has been entrusted with our safety and well being has deceived us, that the individual we entrusted with our care and protection has used torture on suspects who have yet to be proven guilty, and even proven guilty officials does not have any right to torture them because they are also human being like us all they also have their dignity. The only difference is that they are helpless; their cries are chained in silence. Laws should not merely exist on paper, they must be effectively enforced in practice.
REFERENCES
[1] Press Release, Nat’l Human Rights Comm’n, NHRC’s recommendations on Custodial Justice (Sept. 19, 2018),
[2] A Study of Pattern of Custodial Death: A Two-Year Prospective Study, Scispace (Jan. 2019-Dec. 2020),
[3] Mohammad Sahil Khan, Custodial deaths, iPleaders (July 22, 2022),
[4] Eva Verma,An era of guardians becoming perpetrators-custodial deaths: An analysis between the laws of India and UK, 4 Int’l J. Crim., Common & Statutory L. 103, 103–113 (2024),
[5] IJLLR Journal, Concept And History Of Custodial Violence In India, Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research (Feb. 28),
[6] Dr. Asifa Parveen & Dr. Naaz Akhtar Siddique, HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF CUSTODIAL TORTURES IN INDIA, 8 J. Emerging Techs. & Innovative Rsch. 103, 103–113 (2021),
[7] How the police view custodial torture in India, The Hindu (Apr. 8, 2025),
AANCHAL K. SINGH
FACULTY OF LAW, UNIVERSITY OF DELHI