Sensitise cops to curb custodial excesses

It is difficult to expect that the new directive of the apex court to install CCTV cameras in police stations and interrogation centres will usher in a new dawn and put a stop to the use of third-degree methods by the police. Even now, to avoid public notice, police torture often takes place in police barracks, quarters or safe houses. Thus, the installation of CCTVs, though a welcome check, will not do away with the evil practice unless there is strict surveillance and commitment by senior police officers.

The directive of the Supreme Court that CCTVs have to be installed in all police stations and outposts in order to ensure that police officers do not indulge in torture and resort to

third-degree methods has been hailed by many as a landmark decision, which will have a salutary impact and substantially reduce custodial violence by the police. The media has also welcomed the directive and lauded it as a paradigm shift in investigatory work of the police. Many senior police officers, serving as well as retired, have joined the chorus of approval.

However, the efficacy and impact of the directive will be judged by the manner in which this well-meaning order is translated into reality and whether the police will be sincere in implementing them in letter and spirit. Also, vigorous monitoring by the apex court is equally important.

Admittedly, custodial torture has remained the bane of the Indian police for a long period. The Torture Commission (1850) referred to its prevalence in the police stations of the then Madras presidency and also mentioned about the various modes of torture indulged in by the rapacious thana officers. The First Police Commission of 1902, set up by Lord Curzon, deprecated the “unnecessary severity” with which the police officers deal with common people, and particularly, the arrested persons.

The practice has continued unabated and various novel methods of torture have been fashioned. The National Police Commission elaborately analysed the scourge of custodial violence and torture and recommended that in the event of any custodial death, there should be a mandatory judicial inquiry to fasten responsibility on the guilty police personnel followed by suitable deterrent punishment. The National Police Commission found that the departmental inquiries were often not conducted earnestly, resulting either in acquittal or minimal punishment of the errant police personnel.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), soon after its inception in 1993, had issued a clear direction that any instance of death or rape in police or jail custody should be reported to it within 24 hours and failure to do so would be adversely viewed by the commission. In the last 10 years, the annual average death in police custody all over the country has been 145 and in jail custody 1,142. Custodial death patterns have more or less remained unchanged, though there have been fluctuations in the number of incidences in different states.

Evidently, over the years, despite all the warnings and exhortations and numerous police sensitisation programmes of the NHRC and the state human rights commissions as well as other non-governmental agencies, there has not been any appreciable decline in the incidents of custodial deaths or complaints of police torture. This raises the question of not just individual aberrations but also systemic malaise. The police, at times, come under tremendous pressure, though always not overt, to adopt short cuts and illegal methods to deal with dreaded criminals and anti-social elements. There is also significant public approval behind such short cuts.

The reason could be that the criminal justice system in the country has become highly dysfunctional. As cases in the law courts drag on interminably, criminals and terrorists seldom get their just deserts. There is also pressure on the police to deliver results without caring for means and become investigators as well as executioners. I still recall the admonition of the then Chief Minister, while I was heading the state CID in Odisha. He asked me to take steps to eliminate a gang of dreaded dacoits operating in Puri district through means fair or foul and was visibly unhappy because I demurred.

There is also supervisory cowardice to deal firmly with errant and violence-prone officers against whom complaints of abuse of authority and misuse of force are received frequently. Moreover, in every police force, encounter specialists have emerged, who are lionised and not chastised by their superiors.

To cap it all, there is also utter lack of human rights culture in the police, frowning on abuse and misuse of authority. Admittedly, the high courts and Supreme Court on different occasions have condemned custodial torture by the police in scathing terms. In the DK Basu case, the Supreme Court said that custodial torture constitutes a serious assault on human dignity and whenever and wherever it takes place, “the flag of human dignity will fly half mast.”

The court in this case prescribed elaborate rules to be followed by the police during custodial interrogation and enjoined on the police to provide the details of the arrested persons to their nearest relations. Copies of the apex court’s order were posted on the notice boards of all police stations. But this landmark decision did not alter the unsavoury situation. The directive of the court was honoured in the breach as custodial violence by the police continues and is viewed as a cruel necessity.

Incidentally, the victims of police custodial torture mostly comprise the poor, deprived and voiceless sections of society, who have neither the means nor the courage to raise their voice against sub-human behaviour of the all-powerful police force.

Against this backdrop, it is difficult to expect that this new directive of the apex court to install CCTV cameras in police stations, police outposts and other interrogation centres will usher in a new dawn and put a stop to adopting third-degree methods by the police.

Even now, to avoid public notice, police torture often takes place in police barracks or quarters or safe houses. Thus, the installation of CCTVs, though a welcome check, will not do away with the evil practice unless there is strict surveillance and commitment by senior police officers.

To achieve this end, there is also a need for inoculating the police with human rights culture and sensitivity so that they learn to respect human dignity and abjure misuse of force and abuse of authority. This can be done by organising training programmes to sensitise police personnel. They must be made to realise that misuse of force is self-defeating and alienates the police.

All good work done by the police may be washed away by one shocking and inhuman custodial death. Senior police officers have to play the role of change agents and firmly resist extraneous pressure on the police to adopt illegal coercive methods to achieve quick results. Studies show that in Japan, constant emphasis on rectitude by senior cops has had a wholesome elevating impact on the rank and file. This should also be the inspiration and challenge before the Indian police leaders.