Custodial Violence and the Judiciary's Role

The Chhattisgarh High Court, in a recent judgment regarding a custodial death, highlighted a troubling mindset among law enforcement, suggesting a need for significant judicial and systemic reform.

Judiciary's Language and Implications

• The High Court's language implied that the officers intended "to teach a lesson," reflecting a dangerous justification of state violence.
• This perspective rationalizes extra-legal violence as a necessary disciplinary tool, contrary to constitutional principles.

Issues with Current Legal Framework

• The incident reflects broader issues of caste discrimination, as the victim was from a Scheduled Caste.
• The SC/ST Act is often narrowly interpreted, requiring explicit evidence of caste-based motivation, which ignores the structural power dynamics at play.
• Custodial violence remains a persistent issue, with minorities like Dalits and Adivasis disproportionately affected.

Judicial Precedents and Recommendations

• Past Supreme Court judgments have called for procedural safeguards and transparency in detentions.
• Despite clear guidelines, enforcement and compliance remain weak.
• Courts must avoid justifying custodial violence and must emphasize accountability and structural reform.

Conclusion and Call for Reform

• Custodial violence is not a disciplinary measure but a criminal act.
• The SC/ST Act should be applied robustly to cases of social power abuse.
• The judiciary must not condone extra-legal punishment under the guise of deterrence.