Prevention

of
Torture
Bill
2017
Prashant Mavani, is an expert in current affairs analysis & holds a MSc in Management from University of Surrey (U.K.). Above all he is a passionate teacher.
www.studyiq.com
“Torture is a wound in the soul so painful that sometimes
you can almost touch it, but it is also such intangible that
there is no way to heal it. Torture is anguish squeezing in
your chest, cold as ice and heavy as a stone paralyzing as
sleep and dark as the abyss. Torture is despair and fear and
rage and hate. It is a desire to kill and destroy including
yourself”.
- Adriana P. Bartow
 History of torture
 The history of torture throughout the ages reveals that
torture was employed by various communities either in
their religious rites or its code of punishment.
 Torture is a form of crudity and a barbarity which appals
modern civilization.
 Southern Indian provinces it was known as thoodasavary,
Kautilya's Arthashastra, Manu, Greek and Roman laws,
Sharait Law, British Raj, Elizabeth’s era just to name a
few.
 Global Law
 UN Convention against Torture (CAT): The Convention defines
torture as a criminal offence.

 161 countries that signed the 1997 convention

 1997: Signed by India

 Ratification: India is among nine countries which have not ratified it

 Sudan, Brunei, Bahamas, Sao Tome and Principe, Angola, Comoros,
Gambia and Palau
 Even Pakistan ratified the treaty in 2010 after signing it in 2008.
 CAT covers

 Proper guidelines to prevent torture, cruelty, inhuman or degrading

treatment of jail inmates

 Scheme to rehabilitate, provide relief and compensation for victims

of custodial violence and torture.
 DATA
 Home ministry data of 2015
 2012: 126 unnatural deaths of prisoners
 2014: went up to 195

 Home ministry data of 2016 (up to November 30, 2015)

 Percentage of deaths of children aged 0-14 in police custody in
proportion to total deaths in custody during
 2012-13: Seven%
 2013-14: thirty five%
 2014-15: Twenty Six%
 2015-16: Twenty One%
 Timeline in India
 In 2010, the Lok Sabha (lower house) had passed the
Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010 and sent it to the Rajya Sabha
(upper house).
 The Rajya Sabha’s select committee came up with fresh legislation
which was welcomed by many.
 In 2014, the anti-torture bill of 2010 lapsed upon change of
government since the Rajya Sabha had not passed it.
 In 2016, the union home ministry said in parliament that the
law ministry had prepared a draft bill but did not commit on
when they would circulate it or table
 PIL filed by Former Law Minister of India
 The court agreed with former Union Law
Minister Ashwini Kumar, who filed the PIL
plea in his personal capacity, that India,
which had signed the UN Convention
against torture way back in 1997, had still
not ratified it.

 Mr. Kumar submitted that no steps had been

taken to implement the Prevention of
Torture Bill 2010 even six years after it was
passed by the Lok Sabha on May 6, 2010
and recommended by a Select Committee of
the Rajya Sabha of which he had been
Chairman.

 He pointed out that 90% of the States had

no objection for a special law on torture and
the NHRC itself had strongly supported the
need for such a law.
 Government’s attitude
 On April 24, the Solicitor General of India, Ranjit Kumar,
reportedly told a bench of the apex court that the central
government had referred the matter to the Law
Commission which was going to come up with
recommendations.
 “We have looked through the old files and documents.
There is no reference pending with us on a specific law
against torture,” said Sanjay Singh, member-secretary,
Law Commission of India.
 Article 3 and 5 of the CAT
 “1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite
a person to another State where there are substantial
grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being
subjected to torture.”
 As per Article 5 of the CAT, a law against torture or an
amendment to a law, incorporating anti-torture legislation,
will also extend to any territory in which the Armed Forces
Special Special Powers Act (AFSPA) is in force.
 J&K and North East
 Why India needs this law?

 India faces problems in extradition of criminals from foreign

countries because of not having this law against torture.
 Purulia arms drop case of 1995

 Kim Davy is a prime accused in the case.

 He is a Danish citizen.

 CBI faced a major setback for his extradition from Denmark.

 Danish court rejected the plea on the ground that he would risk “torture or
other inhuman treatment” in India.
 Why India needs this law?

 Article 21 of The Constitution of India: Fundamental Right to

Life and Dignity
 India’s international obligations and a matter of international
reputation too.
 A Bench of Chief Justice of India J.S. Khehar and Justice D.Y.
Chandrachud said the government must consider
promulgating a standalone, comprehensive law to define and
punish torture as an instrument of “human degradation” by
state authorities.
 At present neither the IPC nor the Code of CrPC specifically or
comprehensively addresses custodial torture.
 National Human Rights
Commission (NHRC)

 NHRC kept count of incidents of

custodial torture only if the inhuman
treatment led to death and not
otherwise.
 So a majority of cases simply went
unreported.
 NHRC has been strongly urging the
government to recognize torture as a
separate crime and codify the
punishment in a separate penal law.
 Colin Gonsalves who is assisting the
court in the matter has stressed on
the need to have a standalone law in
India.
 Law Commission of India: 273rd Report
 Recommended the Centre to ratify the CAT.
 Sovereign Immunity
 Frame a standalone anti-torture law directly making the State
responsible for any injury inflicted by its agents on citizens.
 The State shall not claim immunity from the actions of its
officers or agents.
 It is the citizens who are entitled for fundamental rights, and
not the agents of the State
 Law Commission of India: 273rd Report
 Indian Penal Code,1860
 Recommends amendment to section 357B to incorporate
payment of compensation, in addition to payment of fine, as
provided under section 326A or section 376D of the Indian
Penal Code,1860.
 Indian Evidence Act, 1872
 Insertion of section 114B: This will ensure that in case a person
in police custody sustains injuries, it is presumed that those
injuries have been inflicted by the police, and the burden of
proof shall lie on the authority concerned to explain such injury.
 Law Commission of India: 273rd Report
 Punishment for acts of torture
 punishment extending up to life imprisonment and fine
 Compensation to Victims
 Courts will decide upon a justiciable compensation after
taking into account various facets of an individual case
 Protection of Victims, Complainants and Witnesses
 protect the victims of torture, the complainants and the
witnesses against possible threats, violence or ill treatment
 Bombay High Court issued guidelines to clamp down on torture including
installation of CCTV cameras in all police stations.
 The Supreme Court guidelines in the DK Basu case are also prominently
displayed in every police station.
 But the biggest challenge in India is of enforcement.
 Justice AN Mulla of the Allahabad High Court had famously said: ”There is
not a single lawless group in the whole of the country whose record
of crime comes anywhere near the record of that single organized
unit which is known as the Indian Police Force.”
 Need lecture notes? Get it
from www.studyiq.com or
Telegram:
https://t.me/Studyiqeducat
ion
Subscribe
Share

 Like

 Comment

 Jai Hind