The Bombay High Court ordered a thorough investigation into a custodial death, giving serious consideration to the circumstances surrounding the event and the actions of the police officials involved. The Bombay High Court intervention comes after a plea was submitted that a man had died because of custodial violence, thereby sparking debates about the possible breach of human rights, among other issues, within the Maharashtra government.
During the hearing, the High Court noted, “Custodial deaths affect the very essence of the Rule of Law and do not form part of routine occurrences.” The judges highlighted how the police have been assigned the task of protecting the citizenry and said there should be strict scrutiny when there’s any misuse of this authority in custody.
Under this petition, it has been reported that the deceased was in police custody regarding an inquiry and subsequently died under circumstances that seem suspicious. Members of the involved family claimed that the man suffered physical assault while under custody and that attempts by the authorities to cover up the death by claiming it to be natural or accidental seemed suspicious. There has been a reported delay in providing him with medication after the incident.
It is important to note that the High Court expressed its dissatisfaction with respect to the timeline of events that unfolded before death, including medical examination timing, documentation of injuries, and finally, reporting of incidents. In fact, the court asked questions as to whether norms framed by the Supreme Court in judgments concerning death in custody were kept in mind. These norms consist of immediate examination by medical professionals, videographic coverage of post-mortem processes, and finally, notification of judicial authorities and relatives.
In its order, the court had asked the state government to submit a status report regarding the findings of the preliminary inquiry, action taken against the concerned officers, and progress in the investigation. In its order, the court had also made it clear that if procedural improprieties were revealed, strict action would be taken, including possible criminal prosecution of the delinquent persons.
It was informed by the state government and its counsel that an investigation was already ongoing and there would be full cooperation with court instructions. It was further indicated that post-mortem findings and medical histories were being reviewed, and statements were also being gathered from people involved. However, the court noted that internal investigations might not help much in cases where grave accusations of prison violence were involved.
Human rights bodies and civil liberties organizations reacted to the High Court’s judgment by expressing their welcome for this crucial step towards accountability for cases involving custodial deaths. Activists brought to notice the fact that “custodial violence persists in this country and often affects persons who belong to vulnerable economic and social backgrounds.”
Legal observers commented that the High Court order reaffirmed the constitutional safeguard provided by Articles 21 and 22, which secured the right to life and freedom from arbitrary arrest. Furthermore, judges’ review is critical in the restoration of public faith in the justice delivery process, particularly where the accused are public officials.
The family of the victim hoped that the investigation would reveal the truth and ensure that justice is served. They called for accountability, compensation, and severe penalties to be meted out to the guilty. The court held that it would take a decision regarding compensation only after analyzing the investigation results.
This issue has been adjourned for further hearing, wherein the High Court would examine the status report and decide whether an independent agency or judicial commission needs to be appointed to carry out the inquiry. However, until now, the court has been very clear that custodial deaths would not be tolerated and that transparency and accountability are non-negotiables. The incident once again puts the focus back on custodial procedures and the imperative of reform in training, the use of body cams, and accountability to ensure the police are operating within the framework of the law and not compromising the dignity of human beings.
