Khaki killers

Custodial violence is not just ugly, it is cowardly and unconscionable in the extreme. Uttar Pradesh is not known for its stellar governance — but what is, arguably, one of the most dismal social indicators emerging from the state is its high number of deaths in police custody. Already the year 2000 has witnessed no less than 159 incidents of this kind. Compare this to the figure for 1995-’96, which stood at 37, and the contrast comes through with startling clarity. That such a trend should manifest itself at a time when public consciousness of human rights abuse is growing indicates how impervious the institution of policing is to correction, especially when there is a marked lack on the part of the political establishment to set things in order.

Crime cannot be fought by those appointed to prevent and punish it themselves turning criminal, no matter what the exigencies are, no matter what the pressures. Police personnel often argue that given the general rot in society, given the fact that even to get the job of a lowly constable requires the greasing of palms, given the reality of the growing criminalisation of society, it would be unrealistic to expect the police to remain immured from the moral depravity all around. While these are important aspects which need to be addressed, they cannot serve as a justification for the police resorting to blackmail, or torture, and getting away with it. The treatment recently meted out to Ajita Pandey in Lucknow, and which was extensively reported in this newspaper, is a case in point. The young girl, who was arrested for three days by the Mahanagar police on the alleged charge that she had stolen a two-wheeler, emerged totally shattered from the ordeal, to the extent that she had to be hospitalised. Her familyinsists that the charge was trumped up by police officials who had demanded money from her.

There have been several court judgments on police excesses. As far back as 1986, in the D.K. Basu versus State of West Bengal case, the Supreme Court had set down procedures that the police have to follow in cases of arrest or detention. Not only did the apex court rule that police personnel conducting such arrests wear accurate, visible and clear identification, with name tags citing their designation, they must prepare a memo of the arrest at the time of arrest, attested by a responsible witness. The court had also ruled that the persons arrested or detained is entitled to have a friend or relative with them and must be given access to their families. It further ordered that arrested persons should undergo a medical examination by trained doctors every 48 hours while in custody. Besides this, the National Human Rights Commission had proposed that every police station in the country have notices informing those detained/arrested about their rights and had wanted a videotape of all postmortemsconducted on those who died in police custody to be sent to the Commission. The dismal evidence from Uttar Pradesh suggests that nothing of this has been translated into law and policy — at least in this state.