Police Reform and the Crucial Judicial Actor

Context: There is a need to bring in police and judicial reforms to check the arbitrary use of power, which has been evidently responsible for custodial torture and deaths.

Judiciary as the beacon of hope: The judiciary has recognised the issue of institutional violence and provided remedies to check arbitrary state action. 

• Secured Rights: Cases such as Joginder Kumar v. State of UP, 1994 and D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal was passed to secure two rights in the context of any state action.

• Right to Life: sought to curb the power of arrest.
• Right to Know: sought to ensure that the accused is made aware of all critical information regarding his/her arrest.
• These guidelines are now a part of the Code of Criminal Procedure, through an amendment in 2008.

• Pushed for Police Reforms:

• Through Prakash Singh v. Union of India, 2006, the court pushed for legislation governing police forces to be passed by all states.

• Support to ‘scientific’ investigations: The court has increasingly relied upon technology to check the archaic practices of using force to extract the truth from the accused. Techniques employed include:

• Narcoanalysis.
• Video recording of investigations and installing cameras inside police stations.

Crystallisation of Systemic failures: Across India, there are as many as 5 custodial deaths a day. Reasons being:

• Institutional apathy: towards the issue of police reform at the state level.
• Judiciary as the weakest branch: 

• Since the real power to realize a substantial change in police practices lies with the ordinary magistrate, the guidelines put out by the higher judiciary become ineffective.
• Judiciary lacks money and power of immediate implementation.

• E.g. Despite criminal laws being struck down by S.C, they continue to be enforced by local police.

• Culture of impunity: Constitutional courts are unable to shed the institutional baggage of protecting the vulnerable morale of the police. 

• The Overworked Magistrate: is in a rush to get done with the remand case, rather than treat an arrested person with care and consideration.
• Lack of political will: at the state level to implement police reforms.

• It took  11 years for Tamil Nadu to implement Prakash Singh guidelines.
• It took 10 years to legalise judicial guidelines given in D.K Basu Case

Way Forward:

• Consider sanctions at a larger scale: Shedding the institutional baggage, monetary penalties should be imposed at the district level, to reflect the failure of the force.
• Reorienting the guidelines: by constitutional courts to change the practices of magistrates.