Course Hero Logo

Supreme court in dk basu vs west bengal custodial

Course Hero uses AI to attempt to automatically extract content from documents to surface to you and others so you can study better, e.g., in search results, to enrich docs, and more. This preview shows page 33 - 35 out of 61 pages.

Supreme Court inD.K BASU vs. West Bengal“custodialdeath is one of the worst crimes in a civilized society governedby the Rule of Law. Does a citizen shed off his fundamentalright to life the moment a policeman arrests him? Can the rightto life of a citizen be put in abeyance on his arrest? Theanswer, indeed, has to be an emphatic NO.”In the case of ‘Joginder singh vs. State of UPSC held that “Police officers has the power to arrest but just for using thispower they can’t arrest, there must be a reasonablejustification for arresting someone. If any act is done anyjustification then it will be an illegal act.”InRaghubir Singh v. State of Haryana, while dealing withtorture in police custody, the court observed: “We are deeplydisturbed by the diabolical recurrence of police tortureresulting in a terrible scare in the minds of common citizensthat their lives and liberty are under a new peril when theguardians of the law gore human rights to death. Thevulnerability of human rights assumes a traumatic, torturesome poignancy when the violent violation is perpetrated bythe police arm of the State whose function is to protect thecitizen and not to commit gruesome offences against them ashas happened in this case. Police lock-ups, if reports innewspapers have a streak of credence, are becoming moreandmore gruesome cells. This development is disastrous to our
34human rights awareness and humanist constitutional order.”In another case ofGauri Shanker Sharma etc. v. State ofU.P., the Court held: “….it is generally difficult in cases ofdeaths in police custody to secure evidence against thepolicemen responsible for resorting to third degree methodssince they are in charge of police station records which they donot find difficult to manipulate as in this case. The offence isof a serious nature aggravated by the fact that it wascommitted by a person who is supposed to protect the citizensand not misuse his uniform and authority to brutally assaultthem while in his custody. Death in police custody must beseriously viewed for otherwise we will help take a stride in thedirection of police raj. It must be curbed with a heavy hand.The punishment should be such as would deter others fromindulging in such behaviour. There can be no room forleniency.”In both of the case, SC shows it’s concern over custodialviolence and brutality of Police.InFrancis Corallie Mullin v. Union Territory of Delhi, theSupreme court has condemned cruelty or torture as beingvoilative of Art 21 and said that “any form of torture andcruelty ordegrading treatment would be offensive of humandignity and it would on its view, be prohibited by Article 21. Itwould be seen that there is implicit in Article 21 the right toprotection against torture or cruel, inhuman which isenunciated in Article 5 of Universal Declaration of Humanright and guaranteed by Article 7 of International Covenant onCivil and Political Rights”.

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

End of preview. Want to read all 61 pages?

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

Term
Fall
Professor
N/A
Tags
criminal law, Universal Declaration of Human RIghts, police station

Newly uploaded documents

Show More

Newly uploaded documents

Show More

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture