New Delhi: Friday was a dark day for the idea of law and order in India – the day began with the news that the Telangana police had killed four male suspects in a rape case. These men were due to stand trial for the rape and murder of a young veterinarian doctor. The day ended with the news that a rape victim in Unnao had died. She had been set on fire by the accused while on her way to court to pursue the case.
While everyone knows that the status of women’s safety in India is poor, this could be a moment to turn the attention on the state of Indian policing.
What does the data say about police accountability?
The most recent report from the National Human Rights Commission has an indictment of the police. It says that police torture is “rampant”:
“Custodial violence and torture continue to be rampant in the country. It represents the worst form of excesses by public servants entrusted with the duty of law enforcement.”
In 2016, Human Rights Watch put out a 114-page report about killings and torture by the police. Government data says that 591 people died in police custody, between 2010 and 2015. It would be hard to find a single case where a police officer has been investigated and convicted for any of these deaths. And yet, 591 people died in police custody.
Police claim that the suspects or under-trials have died in their custody by suicide, illness or natural causes. But the 2016 report says that “forms of torture include severe beatings with boots and belts, sometimes suspending people from their wrists. Autopsy reports examined by Human Rights Watch show injuries and hematomas consistent with blunt force trauma.”
Also read: Money Isn’t Enough to Make India’s Policing More Democratic
In fact, according to government data again, in 67 out of 97 cases in 2015, two things happened: Either police failed to produce the suspect before a magistrate in 24 hours (this is mandated by the Code of Criminal Procedure, so as to prevent indefinite detentions), or the suspect was somehow dead within just 24 hours of custody.
In 2015, police registered cases only in 33 out of 97 custodial deaths.
Is action ever taken against the police?
Human Rights Watch said that the “killings in police custody go unpunished”. Police in India don’t adhere to the proper procedures for arrest, and then when in custody, they have tortured suspects to death. But in spite of this, police breeze through these cases with impunity.
Given that there is such a serious discrepancy between the versions of the police and the families of those dead, and given that medical records sometimes point in a completely different direction from the police, investigations ought to have been urgently done.
But there’s a conflict here: the police themselves will have to investigate allegations of murder and torture against their other colleagues. At this point, their “brotherhood” kicks in, says the Human Rights Watch report. The police shield each other, making accountability impossible.
For every custodial death, a judicial magistrate is supposed to conduct an inquiry and the NHRC is supposed to be notified. But the police have to file the FIR and investigate.
The 2016 report studied a number of cases and found that human rights commissions often recommend financial compensation to the victims, but this does not come with disciplinary action or prosecution for the police. But why would a victim be given compensation if there was no one who committed the aggression? This shows the lack of accountability for police violence in India.
What are some police reforms which are possible?
An important moment in the modern struggle for police reforms was in 1997, when the Supreme Court laid down rules to prevent custodial torture, in the case of D.K. Basu versus West Bengal. These have also been incorporated into the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Also read: Fair and Unbiased Policing Still a Far Cry in India
Some of the rules are simple enough: police should identify themselves while arresting someone, they have to keep a clear log of arrests which is signed by an independent witness as well as the arrested person, and they should ensure that the relatives of the person arrested are informed of where the person is being detained. A person taken into custody should also be produced before a magistrate in 24 hours and cannot indefinitely be confined to jail.
The rules also say that a doctor is expected to examine a suspect soon after the arrest, and list any existing injuries, so that any new injuries can be differentiated as potential custodial torture.
The Union home ministry set up the Rebeiro Committee on Police Reforms in 1998 after the Supreme Court issued directions for this, headed by ex cop Julio Rebeiro. In 2000, the government also set up the Padmanabhiah Committee on Police Reforms.