Our work has made us well aware of the pervasive presence of torture within the Indian criminal justice system. It has forced us to confront the realities of torture and has given us an insight into ways in which in-built checks against custodial torture, such as medical examination by the doctors and the right of the accused to be presented before a Magistrate have routinely failed. An imperfect system with no modernatisation of the police force encourages the use of torture techniques in investigations to secure convictions. Despite being inadmissible, torture based confessions to the police find its way into the evidence through Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Methods of torture have also evolved in very sophisticated and brutal ways across the globe and contemporary research on torture clearly demonstrates the migration of these methods across borders. Forms of torture have far outpaced the methods to detect it. 

While India has signed the UN Convention against Torture, it has not ratified it till date. A comprehensive domestic legislation on torture hasn’t found the necessary political will in Parliament. The challenges within the existing legal framework to hold the errant police personnel accountable has created a brazen sense of impunity amongst the police force. Despite the recognition by the Supreme Court in the DK Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) of the State’s obligation to prosecute instances of custodial violence, the burden to pursue prosecution invariably falls on the victims or their families. Initiating criminal proceedings against a public servant for acts done in discharge of official duty require prior governmental sanction. While the Supreme Court in State of M.P. v. Shyamsunder Trivedi (1995) has ruled that courts should not insist on direct or ocular evidence in these cases, this position is rarely applied. Similarly, claiming reparation for the acts of the perpetrators is not easy. There are significant concerns with the arbitrary manner of calculation of reparation.

Research

Prosecution and Reparation for Torture

Our research on torture focuses on understanding the judicial discourse on prosecution and payment of reparation in cases of custodial torture and deaths. This is being done through a doctrinal study of approximately 300 judgments across the Supreme Court and 12 High Courts.

Policy

Our work on torture also comprises policy and advocacy efforts towards ratification of the UN Convention against Torture and a domestic anti-torture legislation in India. We do this as part of a coalition of organisations against torture in India.

Some of our material

For more, please visit the Blog section and our YouTube channel.