Paragraph numbers below are the court’s original numbering, recovered from the source text.
15. We are surprised that the accused were not charged under Section 302 IPC and instead the Courts below treated the death of Nandagopal as suicide. In fact they should have been charged under that provision and awarded death sentence, as murder by policemen in police custody is in our s opinion in the category of rarest of rare cases deserving death sentence, but surprisingly no charge under Section 302 IPC was framed against any of the accused. We are constrained to say that both the trial Court and High Court have failed in their duty in this connection. c
16. The entire incident took place within the premises <?f Annamalai Nagar police station and the accused deserve no mercy.
17. In this appeal the appellant no.1 has been giv ·, the D sentence of 3 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine, while the other appellants have been given sentence of 1 O years rigorous imprisonmentwith a fine.
18. In the normal course, we could have issued notice of E enhancement of sentence, but as no charge under Section 302 IPC was framed, we cannot straightaway record conviction under that provision and enhance the punishment.
19. For the reasons given above this appeal is dismissed.
20. Before pafting with this case, we once again reiterate that custodial violence in police custody is in violation of this Court's directive in 0. K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal 1997(1) sec 416 and we give a warning to au polis;emen in the country that this will not be tolerated. The graphic description G of the barbaric conduct of the accused in this case shocks our conscience. Policemen must learn how to behave as public servants in a democratic country, and not as oppressors of the people.
21. In D.K. Basu's case this Court observed : MEHBOOB BATCHA AND ORS. v. STATE REP. BY 1105 SUPDT. OF POLICE [MARKANDEY KAT JU, J.] ………. "Custodial violence, including torture and death in the lock-ups, strikes a blow at the rule of law, which demands that the powers of the executive should not only be derived from law but also that the same should be limited by law. Custodial violence is a matter of concern. It is aggravated by the fact that it is committed by persons who are supposed to be the protectors of the citizens, It is C..w .. ~'11itted under the shield of uniform and authority in the four.w~!ls of a police station or lock-up, the victim being totally helpless. The protection of an individual from torture and abuse by the police and other law-enforcing officers c is a matter of deep concern in a free society. In spite of the constitutional and statutory provisions aimed at safeguarding the personal liberty and life of a citizen, growing incidence of torture and deaths in police custody has been a disturbing factor. Experience shows . D that worst violations of human rights take place during the course of investigation, when the police with a view to secure evidence or confession often resorts to third-degree methods including torture and adopts techniques of screening arrest by either not recording the arrest or describing the deprivation of liberty merely as a prolonged interrogation. A reading of the morning newspapers almost everyday carrying reports of dehumanising torture, assault, rape and death in custody of police or other governmental agencies is indeed depressing. The increasing incidence of torture and death in custody has assumed such alarming proportions that it is affecting the credibility of the rule of law and the administration of criminal justice system. The community rightly feels perturbed. Society's cry for justice becomes louder. Custodial death is perhaps one of the worst crimes in a civilized society governed by the rule of law. The rights inherent in Articles 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution require to be jealously and scrupulously protected. We cannot wish c· away the problem. Any form of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment would fall within the inhibition of . Article 21. of the Constitution, whether it occurs during investigation, interrogation or otherwise. If the functionaries of the Government become law-breakers, it is bound to breed contempt for law and would encourage lawlessness and every man would have the tendency to become law . unto himself thereby leading to anarchism. No civilized nation can permit that to happen. Does a citizen shed off . his fundamental right to life, the moment a policeman arrests him? Can the right to life of a citizen be put in abeyance on his arrest? These questions touch the spinal ·cord of human rights' jurisprudence. The answer, indeed, has to be an emphatic 'No'." …………. . {emphasis supplied}
22. Let a copy of this order be sent to Home Secretary and Director General of Polic.e of all States and Union Territories, who shall circulate the same to all police officers up to the level of S.H.O. with a directive that they must follow the E directions given by this Court in D.K. Basu's case {supra}, and that custodial violence shall entail harsh punishment. B.B.B. Appeal dismissed.