Custodial Violence in India | 27 Nov 2025

Source: TH 

Why in News?  

The Supreme Court of India revisited the issue of custodial torture after noting poor compliance with its 2020 order mandating CCTV cameras in police stations and central investigative agency offices, a concern sharpened by reports of 11 custodial deaths in eight months in Rajasthan. 

What is Custodial Violence? 

• Custodial violence: It is not defined in any Indian statute. The term combines custody (meaning lawful detention or safekeeping) with violence, referring to physical or psychological harm inflicted on a person in police or judicial custody. 
  • Under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, custody is classified into police custody (up to 15 days for interrogation) and judicial custody (detention in prison until bail or completion of sentence). 
  • Custodial violence includes torture, assault, harassment, humiliation, rape, and even deaths that occur while a person is under official custody. 
• Custodial Violence in India: 
  • Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthashastra described severe punishments, including mutilation, burning, and attacks by animals. 
  • Medieval Period: Under the Mughals, Shariat laws guided harsh corporal punishments remained a routine part of law enforcement. 
  • British Colonial Period: The Police Act of 1861 created a force designed for repression. 
    • Political prisoners and ordinary detainees were often beaten, starved, or subjected to severe physical punishment.  
    • The Prisons Act of 1894, which granted wide powers to jail authorities, still influences prison administration today. 
  • Post-Independence Period:  After Independence, India largely kept its colonial-era policing and prison systems with little reform.  
    • The old mindset of control and coercion persisted, and custodial violence continued due to outdated laws, weak accountability, and poor institutional modernization. 
    • The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) received 2,346 new intimations concerning death in judicial custody, and 160 intimations of death in police custody during the year 2023-2024. 

How is Custodial Violence Regulated in India? 

Constitutional Provisions 

• Article 21: Guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which includes the freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.  
• Article 20(1): It states that no person can be convicted for an act that was not an offence under the law at the time it was committed, thereby prohibiting excessive or retrospective punishment.  
• Article 20(3): Protects an individual from being compelled to self-incriminate, safeguarding the accused from coerced or forced confessions through torture or pressure.  

Legal Provisions 

• Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2023): It penalizes those who intentionally cause hurt or grievous hurt to extract confessions, information, through violence or coercion.  
• Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS, 2023): It mandates that arrests and detentions follow valid reasons, documented procedures.  
• Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (2023): It invalidates confessions made under inducement, threat, coercion, or promise. 

International Safeguards 

• United Nation Charter, 1945: It mandates that prisoners be treated with dignity, affirming that their fundamental rights and freedoms remain protected under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (India ratified the ICCPR in 1979).  
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948): It protects individuals from torture, cruel treatment, and enforced disappearances, ensuring the right to dignity and security.  

What are the Challenges in Curbing Custodial Violence in India? 

• Weak Legal Framework: India still lacks a clear legal definition of torture, which makes prosecution difficult and leaves large gaps in enforcement.   
  • Colonial laws like the Police Act of 1861 and the Prisons Act of 1894 continue to shape policing and prison administration with minimal reform.  
  • The Prevention of Torture Bill, never became law, and the absence of a comprehensive anti-torture statute remains a major barrier to curbing custodial abuse. 
• Poor Accountability and Institutional Protection: The BNSS requiring prior government sanction for prosecution shield officials from legal action.   
  • Investigations into custodial deaths are often delayed, evidence deteriorates, and inquiries lack independence. As a result, conviction rates for custodial violence remain extremely low. 
• Colonial Policing Culture and Punitive Mindset: The policing culture in India still reflects its colonial roots, where force was a primary tool for maintaining control. 
  • Many officers believe physical coercion is necessary to deal with criminals, and third-degree methods have become part of the accepted police subculture.  
  • Societal approval of “tough action” and political interference further reinforce these punitive attitudes and practices. 
• Lack of Professional Capacity and Corruption: Inadequate training in forensic methods, human rights, and non-coercive interrogation means officers often rely on physical force.  
  • The lack of modern investigative tools and scientific capacity makes torture a perceived shortcut to extract information. 
  • Custodial violence is frequently used as a tool for corruption a powerful station house officer (SHO)-based hierarchy let such misconduct flourish, turning torture into a means of financial gain or influence. 
• Delayed Justice and Weak Oversight Mechanisms: Slow judicial processes, delayed medical reports, and ineffective magisterial inquiries create space for custodial abuse to go unchecked.  
  • Oversight institutions like the NHRC issue guidelines, but their recommendations are advisory and often ignored.  
  • Even court orders such as mandatory CCTV installation see weak compliance, allowing custodial violence to persist with little scrutiny. 

What Measures can Curb Custodial Violence in India? 

• Define Custodial Violence in Law and Ratify CAT: India must clearly define “custodial violence” in law and ratify the UN Convention Against Torture (CAT)., which it signed in 1997 but has not yet ratified.  
  • Ratification would bind India to global standards, require criminalisation of torture, and strengthen accountability mechanisms.  
  • Enacting an anti-torture law aligned with CAT would firmly establish zero tolerance for custodial abuse and oblige the State to prevent, investigate, and punish such violations. 
• Enhance Transparency Through Technology: CCTV monitoring, digital arrest records, and real-time reporting systems like the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network (CCTNS) should be expanded.  
  • Technology reduces opportunities for abuse and improves evidence quality. 
• Improve Professional Capacity: Police personnel require training in non-coercive interrogation, forensic tools, and scientific investigation.  
  • Human rights sensitisation, stress-management skills, and ethical policing modules should be incorporated into training academies. 
• Strengthen Human Rights Institutions: NHRC should be given binding powers rather than advisory roles. Reporting custodial deaths within 24 hours must be made fully mandatory, with consequences for non-compliance. 
• Increase Public Awareness and Legal Literacy: Citizens must be informed of their arrest rights and safeguards. Civil society, media, and community policing initiatives can help reduce tolerance for violent policing. 

Conclusion

Custodial violence persists in India due to weak legal safeguards, poor accountability, and outdated policing structures. Strengthening oversight, defining torture in law, and ratifying CAT are essential to uphold constitutional rights and human dignity.