Abstract
Custodial deaths are deaths that occur when a person is in the custody of law
enforcement authorities, police authorities and other institutions, encompass
death in police custody (at police station or during police detention) and judicial
custody (in prison, or jails). It is considered as flagrant violation of human rights.
Human rights are innate in our nature and without which no one can survive in
society. It poses a severe threat to the Article 14 of Indian Constitution which
discusses about Supremacy of law or Rule of Law. Nonetheless, this paper
examines the underlying reasons of custodial deaths. Whether through alleged
torture, excessive force or institutional negligence. It also interrogates question
of police accountability in the state. Additionally, in this paper we will critically
examine to what extent do custodial deaths in India constitute a gravest violation
of right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. It exposes systems failure or
loopholes in protecting human rights. Why convictions are so rare despite
thousands of deaths. This study adopts doctrinal and analytical approach,
drawing government data, NCRB reports, NHRC reports, independent non
governmental organizations like NCAT and evaluate judicial pronouncements in
prominent custodial death cases. The study also provides recommendations to
prevent future violations.
Key words: Custodial deaths, Human Rights Violations, Police Accountability,
NHRC data, Fundamental Rights.
Introduction
Custody is not defined anywhere neither in substantive law or nor in procedural
laws. The general meaning of custody refers to- the legal right or duty to care, or
manage or to protect someone or something. The words ‘Arrest’ and ‘Custody’
are not simultaneously same, as commonly understood. While, it is true that in
every arrest, there is custody but however, not every instance of custody
constitutes an arrest. Custodial crimes are different from other crimes due to the
lack of transparency and accessibility. Custodial deaths happening because of
systematic flaws, political influence, inadequate police training, weak prosecution, absence of independent investigations, and insufficient punishment for perpetrators, calling for urgent judicial reforms, mandatory accountability standards must be set, independent monitoring, punishment provisions, coercive investigation to scientific investigation strategy. It is of the most delicate areas of criminal justice and human rights. Thousands of cases of custodial deaths are registered every year, yet only small proportion result in conviction.
Custodial Mortality: A Systematic Legal Analysis
Notwithstanding the existence of stringent statutory provisions and penal
sanctions governing custodial deaths. According to empirical data tabled before
Lok Sabha on March 15, India recorded 170 custodial deaths in the financial
year 2025-26, with annual figures consistently ranging between 140 and 176.
Despite this alarming incidence, only one case has been prosecuted and
adjudicated within the Jurisdiction of Tamil Nadu in connection with custodial
deaths during the corresponding five-year period, as per data furnished by the
NHRC.
This figure shows custodial deaths are increasing as compared to previous
financial years.
A disaggregated, jurisdiction-wise analysis of custodial mortality data, as reported by State Police Authorities and National Human Rights Commission of India, reveals a deeply disconcerting pattern of systemic failure in the administration of custodial justice. The state of Bihar topped with 19 reported fatalities, followed by Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, while the states of Gujarat, Maharashtra reported 14 cases each.
Disproportionate Application of third-degree methods for confession or digging
out the truth or eliciting information from them, Police brutality and torture
against constitutionally protected vulnerable groups including Scheduled
Castes, tribal groups, religious minorities, LGBTQIA+ and unorganized sector
laborers, Negligence, demoralization, deliberate deprivation of timely and
adequate medical attention.
Legal and Constitutional Framework Governing Custodial Deaths in India
The Constitution of India, Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, The Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, the Police Act, explicitly guaranteed safeguards of Human rights.
i) Constitutional Provisions:
Article 20(2) provides protection against Double Jeopardy (Nemo Debet Bis
Vexari)- “No one shall be prosecuted and punished twice for the same offence”.
Article 20(3) ensures “the right against self-incrimination, protects forced confessions obtained through custodial tortures”.
Article 22(2) establishes a set of procedural guarantees, that every arrested and
detained person must be produced before the nearest magistrate within 24 hours
of arrest, excluding travelling time. It also strictly prohibits detaining any person
beyond this period without the magistrate’s permission.
ii) Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita:
The BNS Punishes offences committed by public servant under Sections 198 to
205.
iii) Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023
Under Section 47 and 48 of BNSS, if a police officer arresting a person without warrant must immediately informed them of full details of offense committed by them and grounds of arrest to a nominated person, and legal aid is also provided to him to defend himself in the court of law. Even it is mandatory for the state to
provide free aid to an indigent person.
Judicial Approaches to Custodial Deaths
D.K. Basu v State of West Bengal: In this case Supreme Court recognized custodial violence and police torture and stated custodial violence is an attack on human dignity. Even having many recommendations and policies still the cases of torture and deaths in police custody are increasing, so in this case 11 guidelines were given which every police officer has to follow while arresting person and rights are available to every arrested person in this country.
Guidelines are as follows:
• The police personnel should carry clear identification and name tags with their designations.
• Prepare an Arrest memo
• Other person known about his arrest like relative/ friends
• Inspection Memo
• Medical Examination
• Regular Medical Check-ups
• Police Control Room
Non-Compliance leads to departmental action and potential contempt of court.
These guidelines are derived from Article 21 and Article 22(1) of Constitution and
must be followed alongside with other guidelines.
Sathankulam Case
This case got to media coverage owing their brutality, inhumane treatment, it explains how impunity works for the police in India. This case tells how the law is flouted, and certain discrepancies give leeway for custodial death in India. The section below details the grim facts of the event that led to the death of Jayaraj and his son.
Events Leading to Tragedy
- In 2020, India was under a nationwide lockdown during the Covid-19 pandemic. Streets were empty, shops were shut early. In Tamil Nadu, one such incident took place at a mobile phone shop. 31year old Bennix ran the shop in Sathankulam thoothukudi district.
- On the evening of 19th June 2020, Bennix’s father Jayraj was at the shop when police came and picked him up and take him to the Sathankulam police station. Bennix followed the vehicle and asked why his father had been taken? On reaching the police station, the police arrested Bennix too.
- When two officers tried to manhandle the Bennix. He pushed one of them to defend himself. This further antagonized the police officers. Cops started beating him severely to teach him a lesson. While this was happening, Bennix was told to clean blood from the floor. They were then taken to court, where the judge citing the medical report, which claimed the duo were fit for judicial custody, granted the same.
- Just two days later, He died two hours after being admitted to government hospital. Madras High Court take suo motu cognizance following public protests and order immediate judicial inquiry into the deaths, also directs CB-CID to secure the police station, citing distrust of local police.
- The trial continued for years, there were 100 witnesses, including women, head constable, Revathi who was present at the station when the assault took place. Her testimony became an important part of the case. The investigation later handed over to the CBI.
Judgement
Almost 6 years later, in March 2026 a sessions court in Madurai convicted all
nine accused police officers of murder and related offenses linked to custodial
torture. The court handed the death penalty to all the accused. The Judge
delivered the verdict describing the case as “Rarest of rare” crime. and the verdict challenges the historic normalisation of custodial violence and routine, unquestioned police brutality in the region.
This case also raises Questions about procedure and accountability. How did a
government medical officer certify victims as “fit for remand” despite their
Condition. Would the case reach this point without public outrage? and The
Sathankulam case demonstrated that D.K Basu guidelines are completely
ignored.
Conclusion: The way forward
The increasing cases of custodial death are immense threat to the society. Custodial cases suggest police enjoyed benefits and misuse their powers arbitrarily. Several reforms imperatives have been emerged from this analysis.
First, India urgently needs an independent statutory body for investigating
custodial deaths. Second India’s continued non-ratification of the UN Convention against Torture represents a normative failure that undermines both national accountability and international credibility.
Recommendations and Reforms
Custodial Crimes and brutality in India is constitute both an egregious violation of jus cogens norms and a compelling call for urgent legislative and judicial reform. To prevent these crimes, Judiciary can take the following steps:
• Mandatory Installation of CCTV Surveillance Systems.
• Statutory Compensation to the victim and their families and victim
Rehabilitation.
• Statutory Codification of Torture and Enhanced Sentencing.
• Heightened Penal Liability for Custodial Violence Against Vulnerable
Persons
• Streamlining Regulatory Multiplicity and Jurisdictional Overlap
• Judicial Adoption of Res Ipsa Loquitur in Custodial Death Cases
• Suo Moto Cognizance and Expedited Adjudication
• Added mandatory Human rights training as prerequisite for joining or
promotion.
References
1.P. Srikrishna Deva Rao, “CUSTODIAL DEATHS IN INDIA: A CRITICAL INQUIRY INTO LAW, PROCEDURE AND PRACTICE”,6 NLSJ 42(1994).
2.https://thewire.in
3.https://indianexpress.com
