Custodial Deaths in India: Causes & Safeguards Available

Context (TH): The recent custodial death in Tamil Nadu underscores persistent gaps in police accountability and a recurring pattern of impunity despite legal safeguards and public outrage.

About Custodial Deaths

Custodial death refers to the death of a person who is in the custody of law enforcement agencies, such as the police, judicial custody (prison), or other state authorities.
It is widely seen as a serious violation of human rights and the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Causes of Custodial Deaths: Systemic Impunity and Institutional Failure

Despite formal inquiries and arrests, no police personnel were convicted for custodial deaths between 2017 and 2022. This reflects deep-rooted structural issues, including:

Weak Institutional Will: A lack of political and administrative resolve to ensure accountability.
Poor Evidence and Delayed Justice: Inadequate witness protection, delayed trials, and substandard evidence collection weaken prosecution.
Absence of Independent Probes: Custodial death cases are rarely investigated by impartial bodies, compromising credibility.
Institutional Solidarity: A culture of protecting fellow officers often shields the guilty from legal consequences.
Human Rights Cases: Between 2017 and 2022, 74 cases of human rights violations ranging from illegal detention to custodial torture and deaths were filed. However, most resulted in little to no accountability, reflecting a dismal conviction rate and a deeper failure of the justice system.

Tamil Nadu’s disproportional Caste and Custodial Violence

Dalits face a disproportionate burden of police excesses: In 2022, 38.5% of detenues in Tamil Nadu were Scheduled Castes, despite being only 20% of the state’s population.
Preventive Detention Misused: Tamil Nadu had 2,129 preventive detenues as of December 31, 2022, almost half of India’s total.
- These include many not formally charged with a crime but held under laws like Goondas Act, disproportionately impacting marginalised communities.

Legal and Constitutional Safeguards Against Custodial Deaths

Article 21: Guarantees the right to life and protection from arbitrary state action.
Section 176(1A), CrPC: Mandates judicial inquiry in case of custodial deaths.
NHRC Guidelines: Require immediate reporting, post-mortem videography, and independent investigation.
SC Judgments: D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) laid down mandatory procedural safeguards during arrest and detention.

Policy Recommendations

Independent Police Complaints Authorities: Strengthen them with statutory backing and operational autonomy.
Fast-Track Judicial Mechanisms: Special courts for custodial violence cases to ensure time-bound justice.
Mandatory Use of CCTV and Bodycams: Ensure functional, tamper-proof surveillance in all lockups and custody zones.
Strengthen NHRC Oversight: Grant the Commission more prosecutorial powers and resources.
Police Reforms: Implement recommendations of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission and the Prakash Singh case directives to ensure accountability and professional conduct.
Community Policing and Sensitization: Promote human rights education and anti-caste discrimination training in police academies.
Legislative Safeguards: Enact a standalone law against custodial torture, as recommended by the Law Commission and international obligations under the UN Convention Against Torture (UNCAT).

Custodial deaths are a stark reminder that justice must not only be done but seen to be done—within the four walls of the law, not behind the closed doors of custody.