Open Access Research Article
EXAMINING LEGAL SAFEGUARDS AGAINST CUSTODIAL TORTURE: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
Published Paper
Article Details
EXAMINING
LEGAL SAFEGUARDS AGAINST CUSTODIAL TORTURE: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
AUTHORED BY - GEETHA LAKSHMI. R
INTRODUCTION:
Violent interrogation techniques are
now employed in investigations to extract confessions. Custodial violence is
defined as violence committed against inmates while they are in custody. The
rate of custodial violence has increased recently. Torture in custody has been
widely documented, and it frequently results in deaths of inmates. Many crimes
go undetected; only a small number are publicised by the media, leading many to
believe that the punishment for a criminal must be excruciating agony or
torture. Both local laws and international instruments have addressed the
subject of custodial torture, and numerous clauses specifically address it.
These are covered by the subsequent subtopics.
MEANING OF
THE TERM CUSTODY:
Being under guard or being imprisoned
for a short period of time, particularly by the police, is referred to as being
in custody. According to criminal law, a person is detained in a jail or prison
following their arrest or conviction for a crime. Until their prison sentence
expires or they are found not guilty of the claimed crime, these individuals
are under the jurisdiction of the state. Individuals detained by the state have
restricted freedoms and are reliant on law enforcement to provide for their necessities.
In order to protect the safety, well-being, and health of everyone under their
control, officers have a duty of care. There are two sorts of custody under the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1974 the judicial custody and police custody.[1]
Sec 167 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1974 deals with it.
Sec 167-Procedure when
investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours.
S.167 (2) The Magistrate to whom an
accused person is forwarded under this section may, whether he has or has no
jurisdiction to try the case, from time to time, authorise the detention of the
accused in such custody as such Magistrate thinks fit, a term not exceeding
fifteen days in the whole; and if he has no jurisdiction to try the case or
commit it for trial, and considers further detention unnecessary, he may order
the accused to be forwarded to a Magistrate having such jurisdiction;
Provided that—(a)The Magistrate may
authorise the detention of the accused person, otherwise than in the custody of
the police, beyond the period of fifteen days, if he is satisfied that adequate
grounds exist for doing so, but no Magistrate shall authorise the detention of
the accused person in custody under this paragraph for a total period
exceeding—
(i)Ninety days, where the
investigation relates to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for
life or imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years;
(ii)Sixty days, where the
investigation relates to any other offence, and, on the expiry of the said
period of ninety days, or sixty days, as the case may be, the accused person
shall be released on bail if he is prepared to and does furnish bail, and every
person released on bail under this Sub-Section shall be deemed to be released
under the provisions of Chapter XXXIII for the purposes of that Chapter;
Prisoner: A person who has been found
guilty of a crime by a court of law is considered a prisoner. He must serve the
full sentence imposed on him by the conviction in prison. A person in custody
is someone who has been apprehended on suspicion of a crime, placed under
lockdown, and is awaiting trial in a legal setting. Both of these individuals
fall victim to the crime of violent imprisonment.
CUSTODIAL
VIOLENCE:
This refers to acts of violence
against suspects as well as accused people while they are in custody. Custodial
violence is defined as "crime by a public servant against the arrested or
detained person who is in custody,” according to the Law Commission of India.
Both involuntary deaths and torture are considered forms of custodial violence.[2]
Forms of Violence:
Physiological, physical, and mental
violence are the three main categories into which Custodial Violence can be
divided. Physiological violence includes things like psychologically tormenting
the victim, destroying their self-esteem and confidence, and denying them
access to basic necessities like food, drink, and sleep. Threats and
humiliations aimed at the detained individuals, their friends, or relatives.
Physical abuse includes things like using sharp items to scratch the body,
lying naked on ice bars, making someone sleep on the floor, and so on, all of
which can leave a victim deformed and exhausted. Sexual violence includes many
more forms such as rape and verbal abuse.
MEANING OF
CUSTODIAL TORTURE:
Torture is the act of causing great
pain to a person in order to punish them or coerce them into complying with a
directive. Primarily the intense suffering brought about by the coercion of
confessions and the fabrication of proof. It’s a false belief that by causing
them pain, they will confess. According to the Supreme Court, torture in
custody is an egregious violation of human dignity and dehumanisation that
severely damages a person’s personality. Even the Former Supreme Court Justice
V.R.Krishna Iyer states “Custodial Torture is worse than terrorism as because
the authority of the state is behind it”.[3]
DEFINITION
OF CUSTODIAL TORTURE:
The term Torture has been defined by
the World Medical Association “the deliberate, systematic or wanton
infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons, acting alone
or on the orders of any authority to force another person to yield information,
to make a confession or for any other reason”.
Article 1 of the United Nations Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,
1987is the internationally agreed legal definition of torture:
“Torture means 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 person 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. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in
or incidental to lawful sanctions”.
Rome Statute of the International
Criminal Court (ICC)
Article 7 (2)(e) states that “Torture”
means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical
or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused;
except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from,
inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
Different techniques of domestic
torture:
·
Hanging
the victim upside-down
·
Using
lit cigarettes to make marks on the body
·
Striking
the back
·
Hitting
the bare soles of the feet with cans
·
Being
submerged in water
·
Defecation
·
Poking
in live electrical cables
·
Refusing
to provide medical care
·
Stroking
using iron rods
·
Hanging
the accused upside down
·
Depriving
someone of necessities like food, clothing, shelter, a toilet, etc.
·
Making
them sleep on wet floors
·
Using
sharp objects to make cuts and scratches
·
Using
rifle butts as a beating
·
Sexual
and verbal abuse
·
Sexual
intimidation
·
Molestation
and rape
And so forth. A plethora of
innovative techniques are now employed to coerce confessions from the accused,
even making suspects fall victim to them.
CUSTODIAL
TORTURE CAUSES:
The following are the main reasons
why there are any forms of custodial violence, including torture:
·
The
extended trial period allows for more questioning.
·
Insufficient
expertise and familiarity with utilising scientific techniques in criminal
investigations and questioning
·
Ineffective
oversight and examination of the police station by higher-ranking officers
·
Inadequate
instruction in handling suspects and accused
·
The
general public’s ignorance of their rights
·
No
laws prohibiting torture
·
No
effective jail reforms
·
The
strain of work on police
·
Lack
of stringent laws
·
A
reduction in the transparency of jails
·
Lack
of proof keeps incompetent police officers from facing consequences.
PROVISIONS
RELATING TO TORTURE:
Both the domestic and international
law contains provisions for the rights of the arrested person and gives
protection to them under various laws.
(i)
DOMESTIC LEVEL:
Under THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA, 1950:
Article 20 - Protection in respect of
conviction for offences
(1) No person shall be convicted of
any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the
commission of the Act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty
greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the
time of the commission of the offence.
(2) No person shall be prosecuted and
punished for the same offence more than once.
3) No person accused of any offence
shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Article 21 –Protection of life and personal
liberty
No person shall be deprived after
right to life and personal liberty except according to the establishment of
law.
Article 22– Protection against arrest and
detention in certain cases.
(1)
No
person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as
soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall be denied the right to
consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice.
(2)
Every
person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the
nearest magistrate Within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest
excluding the time necessary for the journey from the Place of arrest to the
court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond
the Said period the authority of a magistrate.
(3)
Nothing
in clauses (1) and (2) shall apply—
(a) to any person who for the time being is an enemy alien; or
(b) to any person who is arrested or
detained under any law providing for preventive detention.
(4)
No
law providing for preventive detention shall authorise the detention of a
person for a longer period than three months unless—
a.
An
Advisory Board consisting of persons who are, or have been, or are qualified to
be appointed As, Judges of a High Court has reported before the expiration of
the said period of three months that there is in its opinion sufficient cause
for such detention:
Provided that nothing in
this sub-clause shall authorise the detention of any person beyond the maximum
period prescribed by any law made by Parliament under sub-clause (b) of clause
(7); or
b.
such
person is detained in accordance with the provisions of any law made by
Parliament under Sub-clauses (a) and (b) of clause (7)
(5)
When
any person is detained in pursuance of an order made under any law providing
for preventive detention, the authority making the order shall, as soon as may
be, communicate to such person the grounds on which the order has been made and
shall afford him the earliest opportunity of making a representation against
the order.
(6)
Nothing
in clause (5) shall require the authority making any such order as is referred
to in that clause to disclose facts which such authority considers to be
against the public interest to disclose.
(7)
Parliament
may by law prescribe-
a)
the
circumstances under which, and the class or classes of cases in which, a person
may be detained for a period longer than three months under any law providing
for preventive detention without obtaining the opinion of an Advisory Board in
accordance with the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause (4)];
b)
the
maximum period for which any person may in any class or classes of cases be
detained under any law providing for preventive detention; and
c)
the
procedure to be followed by an Advisory Board in an inquiry under sub-clause
(a) of clause (4)].[4]
Under INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860:
SECTION 166 - Public servant disobeying law,
with intent to cause injury to any person
Whoever, being a public servant,
knowingly disobeys any direction of the law as to the way in which he is to
conduct himself as such public servant, intending to cause, or knowing it to be
likely that he will by such disobedience, cause injury to any person, shall be
punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or
with fine, or with both.
Section 167 - Public servant framing an incorrect
document with intent to cause injury
Whoever, being a public servant, and
being, as 3[such public servant, charged with the preparation or translation of
any document or electronic record, frames, prepares or translates that document
or electronic record] in a manner which he knows or believes to be incorrect,
intending thereby to cause or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby cause
injury to any person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description
for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 220- Commitment for trial or confinement
by person having authority who knows that he is acting contrary to law
Whoever, being in any office which
gives him legal authority to commit persons for trial or to confinement, or to
keep persons in confinement, corruptly or maliciously commits any person for
trial or to confinement, or keeps any person in confinement, in the exercise of
that authority knowing that in so doing he is acting contrary to law, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to
seven years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 330 - Voluntarily causing hurt to extort
confession, or to compel restoration of property.—
Whoever voluntarily causes hurt, for
the purpose of extorting from the sufferer or from any person interested in the
sufferer, any confession or any information which may lead to the detection of
an offence or misconduct, or for the purpose of constraining the sufferer or
any person interested in the sufferer to restore or to cause the restoration of
any property or valuable security or to satisfy any claim or demand, or to give
information which may lead to the restoration of any property or valuable
security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 348 - Wrongful confinement to extort
confession, or compel restoration of property
Whoever wrongfully confines any
person for the purpose of extorting from the person confined or any person
interested in the person confined any confession or any information which may
lead to the detection of an offence or misconduct, or for the purpose of
constraining the person confined or any person interested in the person
confined to restore or to cause the restoration of any property or valuable
security or to satisfy any claim or demand, or to give information which may
lead to the restoration of any property or valuable security, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three
years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 376 – Punishment for rape
(2) Whoever,—
(a) being a police officer commits
rape—
(i) within the limits of the police
station to which he is appointed; or
(ii) in the premises of any station
house whether or not situated in the police station to which he is appointed;
or
(iii) on a woman in his custody or in
the custody of a police officer subordinate to him; or
(b) being a public servant, takes
advantage of his official position and commits rape on a woman in his custody
as such public servant or in the custody of a public servant subordinate to
him; or
(c) being on the management or on the
staff of a jail, remand home or other place of custody established by or under
any law for the time being in force or of a woman’s or children’s institution
takes advantage of his official position and commits rape on any inmate of such
jail, remand home, place or institution; or
(d) being on the management or on the
staff of a hospital, takes advantage of his official position and commits rape
on a woman in that hospital; or
(e) commits rape on a woman knowing
her to be pregnant; or
(f) commits rape on a woman when she
is under twelve years of age; or
(g) commits gang rape, shall be
punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten
years but which may be for life and shall also be liable to fine: Provided that
the Court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the
judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment of either description for a term of
less than ten years.[5]
Section 376 B - Intercourse by public servant with
woman in his custody
Whoever, being a public servant,
takes advantage of his official position and induces or seduces, any woman, who
is in his custody as such public servant or in the custody of a public servant
subordinate to him, to have sexual intercourse with him, such sexual
intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years
and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 376C - Intercourse by superintendent of
jail, remand home, etc.
Whoever, being the superintendent or
manager of a jail, remand home or other place of custody established by or
under any law for the time being in force or of a woman’s or children’s
institution takes advantage of his official position and induces or seduces
any female inmate of such jail, remand home, place or institution to have
sexual intercourse with him, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the
offence of rape, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for
a term which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 503 - Criminal intimidation
Whoever threatens another with any
injury to his person, reputation or property, or to the person or reputation of
any one in whom that person is interested, with intent to cause alarm to that
person, or to cause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to
do, or to omit to do any act which that person is legally entitled to do, as
the means of avoiding the execution of such threat, commits criminal
intimidation.
Section 506- Punishment for
criminal intimidation
Whoever commits, the
offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with
both; If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc.—And if the threat be
to cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by
fire, or to cause an offence punishable with death or 1[imprisonment for life],
or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or to impute,
unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with
both.
Under THE CODE OF CRIMINAL
PROCEDURE, 1974:
Section 41 C - Control room at districts.
(1) The State Government shall establish
a police control room—
a)
In
every district; and
b)
At
State level
(2) The State Government shall cause to be
displayed on the notice board kept outside the control rooms at every district,
the names and addresses of the persons arrested and the name and designation of
the police officers who made the arrests.
(3) The control room at
the Police Headquarters at the State level shall collect from time to time,
details about the persons arrested, nature of the offence with which they are
charged and maintain a database for the information of the general public.
Section 41 B - Procedure of arrest and duties of
officer making arrest.
Every police officer while making an
arrest shall—
(a)Bear an accurate, visible and
clear identification of his name which will facilitate easy identification;
(b)Prepare a memorandum of arrest
which shall be—
(i)Attested by at least
one witness, who is a member of the family of the person arrested or a
respectable member of the locality where the arrest is made;
(ii)
countersigned by the person arrested; and
(c) inform the person arrested,
unless the memorandum is attested by a member of his family, that he has a
right to have a relative or a friend named by him to be informed of his arrest.
Section 41 D - Right of arrested person to meet an
advocate of his choice during interrogation
When any person is arrested and
interrogated by the police, he shall be entitled to meet an advocate of his
choice during Interrogation, though not throughout interrogation.
Section 49 - No unnecessary restraint
The person arrested shall not be
subjected to more restraint than is necessary to prevent his escape.
Section 55A – Health and safety of arrested
person
It shall be the duty of the person
having the custody of an accused to take reasonable care of the health and
safety of the accused.
Section 56 – Person arrested to be taken before
Magistrate or officer in charge of police station
A Police officer making an arrest
without warrant shall, without unnecessary delay and subject to the provisions
herein contained as to bail, take or send the person arrested before a
Magistrate having jurisdiction in the case, or before the officer in charge of
a police station.
Section 57 - Person arrested not to be detained
more than twenty-four hours
No police officer shall detain in
custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all
the circumstances of the case is reasonable, and such period shall not, in the
absence of a special order of a Magistrate under Section 167, exceed
twenty-four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the
place of arrest to the Magistrate’s Court.
Section 163 - No inducement to be offered
(1) No police officer or other person in
authority shall offer or make, or cause to be offered or made, any such
inducement, threat or promise as is mentioned in section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872).
(2)
But
no police officer or other person shall prevent, by any caution or otherwise,
any person from making in the course of any investigation under this Chapter
any statement which he may be disposed to make of his own free Will:
Provided that nothing in this
sub-section shall affect the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 164.[6]
Under the INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT
1872:
Section 24 - Confession caused by inducement,
threat or promise, when irrelevant in criminal proceeding
A
confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal
proceeding, if the making of the confession appears to the Court to have been
caused by any inducement, threat or promise, having reference to the charge
against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and
sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds, which
would appear to him reasonable, for supposing that by making it he would gain
any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the
proceedings against him.
Section 25 -Confession to police-officer not to
be proved
No confession made to a police-officer, shall
be proved as against a person accused of any offence.
Section 26 - Confession by accused while in
custody of police not to be proved against him
No confession made by any person
whilst he is in the custody of a police-officer, unless it be made in the
immediate presence of a Magistrate, shall be proved as against such person.
(ii) INTERNATIONAL LEVEL:
Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, 1948
Article 5 - No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, 1966
Article 7 - No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be
subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.
European Convention for the
Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedom, 1953
Article 3 - No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment.
American Convention on Human Rights,
1978
Article 5 - Right to Humane Treatment- No one shall be subjected
to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment. All
persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with respect for the
inherent dignity of the human person.
African Charter on Human and People’s
Rights, 1986
Article 5 - Every individual shall have the right to the respect
of the dignity inherent in a human being and to the recognition of his legal
status. All forms of exploitation and degradation of man, particularly slavery,
slave trade, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment
shall be prohibited.
Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,
1987
This convention is commonly called as United
Nation Convention against Torture (UNCAT)[7]
contains nearly33 articles in which the concept of Non - Refoulement. The term Refoulement means the forcible return of refugees or asylum seekers to a
country where they are liable to be subjected to persecution. In which non
Refoulement is dealt under article 3 of the convention. Article 2 states the
prevention of torture. Art 3 defines
1.
No State Party shall expel, return (“refouler”) or extradite
a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing
that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.
2.
For
the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent
authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including,
where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern
of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.
The convention deals with the right
to complaint, right to redress etc., Articles 17-24 deal mainly with the
mandate of the Committee against Torture, including article 22 which allows for
the Committee to receive and consider individual communications if a
declaration by the State Party is made. The number of parties to the convention
is 173 and 83 signatories. India has signed this convention on 14thOct
1997 but still now it has not been ratified it.
COMMITTEE
AGAINST TORTURE:
In accordance with Article 17, a
Committee Against Torture has been established. It is made up of ten
individuals who are recognised as highly competent experts in the field of
human rights and who have a high moral standing. Each member serves in this capacity.
Parties that are elected will be the experts. Within a year of the Convention’s
entry into force for the State Party in question, the States Parties are
required to report to the Committee on the steps they have taken to fulfil
their obligations under it through the Secretary-General of the United Nations
(Article 19).[8] As per
Article 24, the committee is required to submit an annual report to the UN
General Assembly and the state parties regarding its activities under this
convention. The Committee was created to ensure that the Convention against
Torture (UNCAT) is effectively monitored, and it encourages states to abide by
the convention’s international obligations. After reviewing each report, the
committee issues concluding observations to state parties outlining its
concerns and recommendations. To carry out their monitoring duties, the other
three mechanisms
•
To
take individual grievances or correspondence into consideration; conducting
inquiries
•
To
take into account state complaints
Article 17 to 24 of the United
Nations Convention against Torture (UNCAT) deals exclusively about the
Committee against Torture
273rd Law Commission
report
On October 30, 2017, the Ministry of
Law and Justice received the report from the Law Commission of India, chaired
by Dr. Justice B. S. Chauhan, regarding the “implementation of the ‘United
Nations Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading
Treatment or Punishment’ through legislation.” Although it was signed on
October 14, 1997, India has not yet ratified the convention. In July 2017, the
Law Commission was tasked with reviewing the case after the Supreme Court made
a recommendation. While the Court was considering a case involving torture in
connection with the death penalty, this recommendation was made.[9]
The Commission suggested modifying
the 1973 Code of Criminal Procedure to permit compensation payments in cases of
torture. It made this recommendation citing cases where compensation was
granted by courts for different types of torture, such as torture committed
while a person was being held illegally or while under custody. The Commission
suggested amending the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 to make it so that injuries
sustained while a person is in police custody will be assumed to have been
caused by the police. The police authorities will have the burden of proof to
justify these injuries.
SUGGESTIONS TO CURB CUSTODIAL VIOLENCE:
•
Installing CCTV cameras and monitoring their
efficient operation. CCTV cameras are used to monitor the Higher officials
during investigations and questioning.
•
Periodic psychological and physical medical
examinations are necessary to guarantee that all police personnel are in a fit
state of mind to perform their duties.
•
The influence of media on public opinion, Even prior
to the verdict, the media presents the accused as criminals; more specifically,
they portray suspects as offensive criminals.
•
Not all police officers torture detainees or cause
them great pain during interrogations or investigations; some of them perform
excellent work and adhere to strict protocols, which leads to frequent
transfers.
•
• Police personnel should answer to a new trail body
rather than to another police officer in the event that a crime involving abuse
of detainees is called into question.
•
• A higher level of punishment ought to be meted out
to the public servant who tortures witnesses during an investigation.
•
• Senior officials should be held liable through
vicarious liability for actions taken by their subordinates.
•
A system to address police personnel’s mental health
will be developed.
•
All police stations are required to display posters
outlining the accused person’s rights.
•
The application of the 273rd report of
the Law Commission of India from 2017.
•
By ratifying the United Nations Convention against
Torture, India should adhere to international norms.
CONCLUSION
Even in the
present day, there are still more cases of severe and prolonged imprisonment,
including deaths in custody. Torture is not limited to those who are already
convicted; it also extends to those who are simply suspected of committing a
crime. The majority of cases go unreported; very few are made public. Despite
the fact that both domestic and international law contain numerous provisions,
they are not consistently upheld. It is
unfortunate that state employees were responsible for this crime, since it is
the police’s primary duty to investigate and address complaints about crimes
involving citizens.
In this
instance, inmates are harmed by police, jail officials, and other parties;
although the police are the party to whom the complaint is directed, the
investigation is largely ineffective. Therefore, agencies other than the police
must conduct the investigation into custodial violence. India will not subject
anyone to torture or other cruel, inhumane treatment or punishment if it
ratifies the Convention Against Torture. The public wants to punish those who
commit serious offences with greater severity. When these laws are enforced
properly the offence can be controlled.
[1] Prof N. V. Paranjape – Criminology
and Penology
[2]
Prof N. V. Paranjape - Criminology and Penology
[3] www.livelaw.in/amp/law firms/law firm
articles/custodial violence rule of law indian evidence act national human rights
commission
[4] Article 22 of The Constitution of
India, 1950
[5] Section 376 of The Indian Penal code, 1860
[6] Section 163 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
[7] www.ohchr.org/en/instruments mechanisms/instruments/convention
against torture and other cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
[8] www.ohchr.org/en/instrumentsmechanisms/instruments/committee
against torture
[9]Law Commission Report Summary
Implementation of United Nations Convention against Torture.
Article Information
EXAMINING LEGAL SAFEGUARDS AGAINST CUSTODIAL TORTURE: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
Authors: GEETHA LAKSHMI. R
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/10/25
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.