Police Brutality refers to the use of excessive or unnecessary force by law enforcement officers, which can result in physical harm, injury, or even death of the arrested person. Instances of police brutality is a cause of concern as they violate human rights, undermine public trust in the police, and may possibly lead to social unrest. Right from Jallianwalabagh Massacre in 1919, the Hamshimpura massacre in 1987 to the recent Bennix- Jayaraj custodial death in 2020, India has had numerous cases of police brutality reported over the years. Incidents of excessive force, custodial deaths, torture, and abuse have been documented in various parts of the country and many cases go unnoticed. These cases often raise questions about the accountability and training of Law enforcement agencies, as well as the necessity for better oversight and reforms in the Justice system.

RISING CASES OF POLICE BRUTALITY:

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) registered a total of 90 deaths in police custody from January to December 2020. These included 11 deaths in January, five deaths in February, 11 deaths in March, six deaths in April, three deaths in May, five deaths in June, 11 deaths in July, 12 deaths in August, four deaths in September, eight deaths in October, eight deaths in November and six deaths in December. But, a report published by a consortium of NGO’s against torture documented deaths of 111 persons in police custody across the country in 2020. Out of the 111 deaths in police custody in 2020 documented in this report, 51 persons died due to alleged torture, 35 persons died in alleged suicide, eight persons died due to suspected foul play, five due to alleged sudden illness, two while attempting to flee, while others died due to various reasons.[1]

Police brutality and custodial torture has had a significant impact on people across India and often these incidents of extrajudicial killings, custodial deaths, and other forms of abuse of power by law enforcement results in public loss of trust in Law enforcement, Social unrest and protests and deepening mistrust between communities and law enforcement agencies.

1. The custodial death of Jayaraj and Bennix(2020) :

The case of Bennix Jayaraj and his father Jayaraj in India had a significant impact on people across the country and beyond. Bennix and Jayaraj were both arrested on June 2020, by police in Santhankulam, Tamil Nadu, for allegedly violating lockdown restrictions during COVID-19 pandemic. Tragically, they died a few days while in police custody. This incident sparked a huge public outrage and protests as people demanded justice for the father-son duo. The case shed light on the issue of police brutality and raised questions about the treatment of individuals in custody.

In response to the public outcry, authorities conducted investigations, and the police officers involved were arrested and faced charges. However, for many, this case represented a large police brutality and impunity, emphasizing the need for sustained efforts to address deep-rooted issue within the system.

• Targeting of Marginalized communities:

According to the NCRB report, 2019 the proportion of marginalized communities in prison is 50.8% of which 18.1% are Muslims, 21.2% are SCs and 11.5% are STs. The targeting of marginalized communities by the police and framing them as “habitual offenders” is a serious issue in India[2]. This practice is often a result of systematic biases, prejudices, and discriminatory attitudes within the law enforcement system, which disproportionately affects vulnerable groups based on factors such as caste, religion, gender, ethnicity and economic status.

Recently in chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh, happened a most brutal incident where 10 people of “Kuravan” community (a marginalized community in Tamil Nadu) including 5 women, 3 men and 2 children of age 5 and 7, were illegally arrested and tortured brutally asking them to confess to a theft. The very reason for their arrest is because that they belong to a marginalized community and they are habitual offenders.[3]

This practice of systematic bias arose from the British era, where they established Criminal tribes act, 1871 which declared everyone belonging to a certain castes to be born with criminal tendencies. Though the law is not in existence now, the mentality that those certain castes who were framed to be born with “criminal tendencies “still exists.

• Is use of force by the police Justified?

“Truth can’t be revealed without Torture”. The use of force by police can be justified under certain circumstances, but it must always be done within the boundaries of the law with a focus on protecting human rights and preserving public safety. Law enforcement agencies are authorized to use force to maintain order, protect themselves, and others from harm, and to enforce the law. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution provides that: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”. In the case MANEKA GANDHI V. UNION OF INDIA,[4]the supreme court has interpreted the meaning of “procedure established by law” that would deprive a person of his liberty as one that is “just, fair, and reasonable”.  Hence the use of force must be proportional, necessary, and based on the principles of legality, legitimacy, and proportionality.

Article 312 establishes a national police of force but doesn’t specifically govern the use of force. Chapter V of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 deals with arrests by the police. As per section 46, a police officer may use “all means necessary” to affect an arrest when either the person forcibly resists or attempts to escape. And there is no right to cause death of a person who is not accused of an offence punishable with death or with life imprisonment. Chapter X of the code deals with “Maintenance of public order and tranquility”. As per section 129, a police officer may use force to disperse an assembly but doesn’t specify the amount of force to be used.

In the case of ANITA THAKUR V. STATE OF J&K[5], the Supreme Court observed that: “In those cases where assembly is peaceful, use of police force is not warranted at all. However, in those situations where crowd or assembly becomes violent it may necessitate and justify using reasonable police force. “

HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION:

Police Brutality and misconduct often results in Human rights violation and this has been reported in various instances, where Law enforcements officers have been accused of using excessive force, torture, custodial deaths, sexual violence and other forms of abuse. One such instance is the Thoothukudi “sterlite protest” case in Tamil Nadu which had gained national attention in 2018. In May 2018, thousands of protestors took to the streets to demand the closure of the sterlite plant due to accusations of causing environmental pollutions and health hazards to the local inhabitants. The police responded with the use of force; include firing live ammunition at the protestors. As a result, 13 were killed and several others injured. The incident raised serious concerns about the excessive use of force by the police, leading to loss of life and injury of peaceful protestors. The right to peaceful assembly and expression of opinion is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19 of the Indian constitution and is a fundamental human right principle under Article 20 of UDHR, which were violated in this instance. This is just one example of how Human rights are violated by the police in India. It highlights the importance of upholding human rights principles including right to life, freedom of expression, and peaceful assembly, when dealing with public protests or demonstrations. If the torchbearers of the society themselves involves in unjustifiable means of use of force it is not acceptable.

1. Rights of an accused person

The rights of an arrested person are crucial protections afforded to individuals to ensure that they are treated fairly and justly during the process of arrest, detention and interrogations. These rights are essential to safeguard against abuse of power and violations of basic human right.

Right to dignity is the ultimatum of human rights. Every arrested person has right to life, dignity and security. That is the protection of article 21 is available even to convicts in jail. Also Article 3 of UDHR, everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. The convicts are not by the reason of their conviction deprived of the fundamental rights that are guaranteed to them. In SUNIL BHATRA v. DELHI ADMINISTRATION[6], it was held that the integrity of mental and physical personality is an important right of a prisoner and must be protected from all sorts of atrocities until fair procedure is complied with. Also in KISHORE SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[7], the Supreme Court held that the use of “third degree violence” is violative of Article 21.

Article 20 of the Constitution provide for the protection in respect of conviction for offences. According to which a) No conviction for violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged b) No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once and c) No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.

Article 22 of the constitution provides for the safeguards against arbitrary arrest and detention in certain cases. According to this provision, no person shall be detained without being informed the ground of arrest and can’t be prevented from reaching out a legal practitioner of his choice i.e., Right to counsel is a fundamental right under article 22(1).Also, every person arrested and detained in custody should be produced before the nearest magistrate within 24 hours of such arrest.

Section 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence act, 1872 sets out a protection that the confession made to police can’t be admitted in court unless made before the magistrate.

• Major Judgment by Supreme Court on police violence and custodial death.
• Rudal shah v. state of Bihar[8](1983):

In this case, the petitioner was acquitted on June 30^th 1968 but was released from jail only on Oct. 16^th 1982 when court intervened. The supreme court directed the Bihar Government to pay compensation of Rs.30,000 to the petitioner who remained in the jail for 14 years even after acquittal because of the irresponsible behavior of the state.

• Saheli v. Commissioner of police[9](1990):

The Supreme Court in this case directed the Delhi Administration to pay Rs.75, 000 as an exemplary compensation to the mother of a 9 year old who died due to sexual assault by the police.

• Nilabati  v. State of Orissa[10](1993):

The petitioner, the mother of the accused son came to know that her son was found dead near a railway track, which was later found to be that he was beaten to death while in police custody. The Supreme Court awarded Rs.1.5 Lakh as an interim compensation.

• D.K.Basu v. state of W.B[11](1997):

This case holds an immense significance in India as it establishes crucial guidelines to prevent custodial torture and protect the fundamental rights of individuals in Police custody. Also it was held that, “Custodial death is perhaps one of the worst crimes in a civilized society governed by the rule of law.” The court laid the following guidelines to be followed in all cases of arrest or detention till legislative measures are taken:-

1. The police personnel should carry clear identification and name tags with their designation.
2. The police should have an arrest memo.
3. Other person (friend or relative) should have known about his arrest.
4. Information of arrest to be given to friend or relative of the arrestee if he lives outside the district via telegram within 8-12 hours of arrest.
5. Arrestee should have been made to know the rights available to him.
6. An entry in the diary must be made regarding the arrest of person.
7. Inspection memo must be signed by both the arrestee and the police officer and its copy provided to the arrestee.
8. Person should be medically examined within 48 hours of detention.
9. Copies of all documents (including memo) must be sent to the magistrate.
10. Arrestee must be permitted to meet his lawyer during interrogation.
11. The officer making the arrest should inform the control room regarding the details of arrest and place where arrestee is kept in custody within 12 hours of arrest.4

• Duties and penalties for police officers:

The duty of a police officer in maintaining the human rights of an arrested person is of paramount importance. The code of conduct for law enforcement officials, 1979 emphasizes the duties and the code of conduct for police officers. According to Article 2 of this code, Every Law enforcement officials must respect and protect human dignity and maintain and uphold Human Rights of all. Article 3 says that use of force is permitted only when strictly necessary and to the extent required for the performance of their duty. Also Article 5 says that no official may inflict, instigate or tolerate any act of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, nor may any law enforcement official invoke superior orders or exceptional circumstances such as a state of war or a threat of war, a threat to national security, internal political instability or any other public emergency as a justification of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Section 41 of CrPC was amended to include safeguards so that arrests and detention made without warrant. Section 330& 331 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides punishment for injury inflicted for extorting confession.

ANTI-TORTURE BILL:

The death of George Floyd in the US resulted in heavy protests and public outcry and as a result of such protests, congress decided to pass a police reform bill and along with this it is discussed to maintain a national database which will register all police misconducts. A similar bill was also discussed in Indian parliament 10 years before, though discussed so many times the bill is not passed yet. UN convention against Torture, 1975 was the parent legislation to this. As per this, a bill was presented to Lok Sabah in 2010 named, Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010. According to this bill, any public servant committing a torture will be punished. It defines torture as an act of grievous hurt that impairs his life, limb mentally or physically done to extort confession and prescribed punishment for 10 years. The bill was passed by Lok Sabah and it went to Rajya Sabah. The Rajya Sabah select committee provided certain suggestions: i) to expand the definition of torture ii) Torturing of women and children should have severe punishment iii) To set up an independent authority to investigate complaints. The bill was presented several numbers of times in Rajya Sabah but till now it didn’t become a Law. [12]

The main reason behind the delay is that the bill to become an act requires changes in Indian Penal code, Indian evidence act and criminal procedure code. Only time will tell if this bill will turn into a Law.

ROLE OF MEDIA:

The media plays a significant role in addressing police brutality by bringing attention to incidents, raising public awareness, and holding law enforcement agencies accountable. Usually, media plays as an arena of raising awareness and spreading the instances of police brutality that occurred in a small part of the country to larger section of people. One notable example is the Hathras gang rape case, 2020. This case received extensive media coverage, exposing police brutality and mishandling of the case. As the news of the horrific incident spread, media covered the case extensively, highlighting the brutality of the crime and the victim’s suffering. The media played an important role in amplifying the public anger by exposing police mishandling of the case and accused of being negligent and unresponsive.

Media plays a crucial role in conducting a separate investigation in bringing out the truth which is often referred to as “investigative Journalism”. Thus media plays a crucial role in bringing to light such violence and holding authorities accountable for their actions.

 CONCLUSION:

Police Brutality in India remains a significant challenge that undermines human rights and erodes public trust in law enforcement. Through a critical analysis of its causes, human rights implications, and potential solutions, we can work towards a more accountable and “rights-respecting” police force. By strengthening legal frameworks, promoting transparency, and fostering dialogue between stakeholders, meaningful progress can be achieved in curbing police brutality and upholding Human rights in India.

---

[1] CAMPAIGN AGAINST TORTURE, http://www.uncat.org/ (Last visited July 20,2023)

[2] NATIONAL CRIMES RECORD BUREAU, https://ncrb.gov.in/en/crime-india-2019-0 ,(Last visited July 21,2023)

[3] A.D. Rangarajan, Six policemen booked for custodial torture of migratory tribes from Tamil Nadu ,THE HINDU(Published on June 20, 2023 ),https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/six-policemen-booked-for-custodial-torture-of-migratory-tribes-from-tamil-nadu/article66990252.ece

[4] Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597

[5] Anita Thakur v. State of J&K, (2016) 15 SCC 525

[6] Sunil batra v Delhi Administration, 1978 4 SCC 409

[7] Kishore singh v State of Rajasthan, 981 AIR 625 1981 SCR (1) 995 1981 SCC (1) 503

[8]  Rudal Shah v state of Bihar, AIR 1983 SC 1086

[9]  Saheli v. commissioner of police, AIR 1990 SC 513

[10]  Nilabati v. State of Orissa, AIR 1993 SC 1960

[11]  D.K.Basu v. state of west Bengal, AIR 1997 (1) SCC 416

[12]PRS Legislative Research ,https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-prevention-of-torture-bill-2010 (Last visited on July 22,2023)

---

Author: Harinibai R

---