D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal

Facts

Acting on a letter highlighting deaths in police custody, the Supreme Court took up the issue of custodial violence and torture as a violation of fundamental rights. The case became a vehicle for laying down systemic safeguards governing arrest and detention.

Issues

• Do custodial torture and death violate the right to life and dignity under Article 21?
• What safeguards must attend arrest and detention, and is monetary compensation available as a public-law remedy for such violations?

Arguments

The petitioners contended that custodial violence is a gross assault on human dignity and Article 21 requiring enforceable safeguards and compensation. The State acknowledged the problem but stressed practical exigencies of policing and investigation.

Held

The Court held that custodial torture and death are an affront to human dignity protected by Article 21, and that a detainee retains fundamental rights subject only to lawful restrictions. It issued detailed, binding 'requirements' to be followed in all cases of arrest and detention (identification of officers, arrest memo with witness, informing a relative, medical examination, etc.). It firmly crystallised the principle that the Court may award monetary compensation as a public-law remedy under Articles 32 and 226 for established Article 21 violations. It also held a detainee has the right to consult a lawyer, though not to have counsel present throughout interrogation.

Ratio decidendi

Custodial violence violates Article 21; the State bears enforceable procedural duties on arrest, and constitutional courts may grant compensation as a public-law remedy for violation of the right to life and personal liberty.

Significance

A landmark on prisoners'/arrestees' rights and constitutional tort. Its arrest guidelines were later substantially incorporated into the Code of Criminal Procedure (s 41B and related amendments). It consolidated the compensation jurisprudence begun in Nilabati Behera and Rudul Sah.

Related