02.07.2007 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Mr. Manoj Shaw arrested without a warrant on 31 May 2007; his wife, Ms. Arpita Shaw was reported to have been physically abused by police officers at the same station; OMCT is deeply concerned over the arbitrary arrest and abusive treatment against Mr. Shaw and his wife ("Abusive Treatment And Impunity [IND 020707]") [ID 20865]

Document(s): Open document

02.07.2007 - Source: South Asia Human Rights Documentation Centre

Report on India's Armed Forces Special Powers Act and the implicit chance to abuse and torture suspects with impunity in the future (" Masooda Parveen: Judicial Review of India’s Special Security Laws Goes from Bad to Worse [HRF/168/07]") [ID 20869]

Document(s): Open document

27.06.2007 - Source: Asian Centre for Human Rights

Statement of the National Conference on Prevention of Torture in India ("Declaration of the National Conference on Prevention of Torture in India"), Autor: National Conference on Prevention of Torture in India [ID 20875]

Document(s): Open document

26.06.2007 - Source: Amnesty International

10 years after having signed UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, India has yet to ratify it; effective changes in domestic legislation are necessary to end widespread torture across country ("After a decade of empty promises, time to ratify CAT and end torture [ASA 20/015/2007]") [ID 20876]

Document(s): Open document

25.06.2007 - Source: Asian Centre for Human Rights

Report on torture in India (vulnerability of certain groups; torture in armed conflict situations; laws facilitating the perpetration of torture; violations of the medical ethics) ("Need for a National Law for Prevention of Torture") [ID 20899]

Document(s): Open document

06.03.2007 - Source: US Department of State

Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2006") [ID 19107]

"The law prohibits torture and generally did not allow for confessions extracted by force to be admissible in court; however, authorities often used torture during interrogations to extort money and as summary punishment. There were allegations of confessions derived under torture. In some instances, these confessions were subsequently used as evidentiary support for an execution sentence. The Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act of 2005 mandated a judicial inquiry into any death or rape of a woman in police custody; however, human rights groups asserted that the new law had not decreased the prevalence of custodial abuse or killings.   The ACHR alleged that custodial deaths was a severe problem and that police regularly used torture. Because many alleged torture victims died in custody, and other victims were afraid to speak out, there were few firsthand accounts. Marks of torture, however, were often found on the bodies of deceased detainees. The prevalence of torture by police in detention facilities throughout the country was reflected in the number of deaths in police custody (see section 1.a.). Police and jailers typically assaulted new prisoners or threatened violence in exchange for money, favors, and personal articles. In addition, police commonly tortured detainees during custodial interrogation. Although police officers were subject to prosecution for such offenses, the government often failed to hold them accountable. According to Amnesty International (AI), torture usually took place during criminal investigations and following unlawful and arbitrary arrests.   NGOs asserted that custodial torture was common in Tamil Nadu. One human rights lawyer claimed that all police stations in Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, and Chandigarh have torture cells to "soften up" the accused prior to court appearance. However, increased reporting of custodial torture may be the result of greater awareness. In some cases, the state government provided compensation for victims. In July the Madras High Court ordered the state government to pay $6,666 (Rs 294,000) to a woman. The AHRC claimed that local police in Kerala continued to use torture and assault as a means of criminal investigation.  "

Document(s): Open document

06.03.2007 - Source: US Department of State

Torture in Jammu & Kashmir ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2006") [ID 19111]

"In Jammu and Kashmir, torture victims or their relatives reportedly had difficulty filing complaints, as local police allegedly were instructed not to open a case without permission from higher authorities. In addition, under the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act of 1990, no "prosecution, suit, or other legal proceeding shall be instituted against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers of the act," without the approval of the central government. The act gives security forces the authority to shoot suspected lawbreakers and those disturbing the peace, and to destroy structures suspected of harboring violent separatists or containing weapons. Human rights organizations alleged that this provision allowed security forces to act with virtual impunity"

Document(s): Open document

13.12.2006 - Source: Asian Centre for Human Rights

Custodial Violence ("SAARC Human Rights Report 2006") [ID 18212]

"Torture and other forms of custodial violence have been an integral part of administration of justice in India. The NHRC received a total of 1493 cases of custodial deaths during 2004-2005, out of which 136 deaths occurred in police custody and 1357 deaths in judicial custody.[13] However, prosecution of the guilty officials was extremely low as the government of India provided impunity to the security forces under section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 6 of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) of 1958. On 11 March 2005, the Assam Rifles challenged the legality of instituting the Judge C Upendra panel by the State Government of Manipur to probe the Bungte Chiru firing incident in which LD Rengtuiwan was killed on 16 November 2004 on the ground that the State Government had no jurisdiction to inquire into the conduct of the personnel belonging to the armed forces under the AFSPA of 1958.[14] In Jammu and Kashmir, about 230 police and security personnel were reportedly awarded punishments for human rights violations committed from 1990 to 2004[15] but the details were not made public. The state government of Jammu and Kashmir also failed to make the report of a magisterial probe into the killing of a school student Nitish Sharma alias Nishu of Roop Nagar on 28 October 2005 public though the report was submitted on 29 November 2005.[16] Medical examinations into the custodial death of Satnam alias Satta, a Dalit youth at Lohian Police station under Jalandhar district of Punjab on 6 February 2005;[17] death of Kishan Singh on 16 March 2005 at Shahdara police station in East Delhi;[18] death of Rawoof on 9 May 2005 at Jayanagar police custody in Bangalore, Karnataka;[19] death of Gurmail Singh at Pehowa police station of Kurukshetra district in Haryana on 13 May 2005;[20] and death of Udayakumar, resident of Nedungadu, Kerala at City Fort police station on 27 September 2005[21] reportedly confirmed torture of the victims. Many police officials were suspended after prima facie evidence of violations of rights was found against them. Those police personnel who were reportedly suspended included Circle Inspector Ravi Kumar and Sub-Inspector of Police Mallikharjuna Gupta for custodial death of one Chalapathi in Tiruputi in Andhra Pradesh on 12 January 2005;[22] a police sub-inspector Anisetti Raghu for the custodial death of Irpha Sitaiah at Charla police station in Khammam district of Andhra Pradesh in January 2005;[23] five policemen, namely, Head Constable Pawan, Constables Manoj, Surender, Malkeet and Pankaj of the Special Staff of East district of New Delhi for the torture of Akhtar, a tea stall owner in February 2005;[24] four policemen including Rajendra Prasad Bahera, the inspector-in-charge of Shahid Nagar police station of Orissa for the custodial death of Dilip Kumar Sahoo alias Swain on 3 March 2005;[25] and two policemen including SHO of Malihabad police station, Shashi Bhusan Dwivedi, who were suspended for the custodial death of Rashid, the Block Development Committee member of Rahimabad, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh on 3 December 2005.[26] Following the filing of a habeas corpus petition before the Andhra Pradesh High Court in October 2005, five policemen including Kurnool town circle-inspector Sivashanker Reddy and sub-inspector Maheswar Reddy were suspended for the illegal detention of Mr Seshanna Goud, Mr Panduranga Swamy Goud and Mr Ravindra Goud in October 2005. Their detention was not recorded and the police initially denied in the court that the three were in their custody.[27] Magisterial inquiries were ordered in a number of custodial death cases including the custodial death of Abdul Gani Dar at the hands of Special Operation Groups personnel at Magam police station in Budgam district in Jammu and Kashmir on 19 January 2005;[28] Dwipen Bayan at the Udalguri police station in Darrang district of Assam on 26 January 2005;[29] Tadipatri Eswaraiah, resident of Akutotapalli village in Anantpur district of Andhra Pradesh in January 2005;[30] and Buru Bhumij at Mathurapur police station in Sivasagar district of Assam on 21 December 2005.[31] In a few cases, the courts awarded punishment including sentencing of five policemen namely Sub Inspector (SI) Anand Pratap Singh Parihar, Additional Sub-Inspector (ASI) Nand Kishore Mishra, constables Vijay Pandey, S Mishra and Mohan Singh to 5 years of imprisonment by a special court in Shahdol district of Madhya Pradesh for the custodial death of Suhawan Kewat on 10 December 1997;[32] and sentencing of constable Kishore Singh to life imprisonment, 10 years jail term to ASI Sumer Dan and 5 years jail terms to the then SHO of the Barmer police station, Sohan Singh, by the Additional District Judge Chandra Sekhar Sharma of Fast Track Court, Barmer, Rajashthan on 21 December 2005 for severing the private part of Jugta Ram in police custody.[33] In a few cases, the courts also directed the authorities to take actions against guilty personnel. In June 2005, the Madhya Pradesh High Court directed to arrest and initiate action against the Superintendent of Police of Lokayukta, Bhopal, Mokham Singh Nayan, Inspector BP Singh and two constables for the custodial death of Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax Department, Rishabh Jain at Lokayukta police office on the night of 15 July 2004.[34] The Andhra Pradesh High Court in its order on 21 December 2005 also directed to take action against inspector T. Srinivas Reddy of LB Nagar police station for the illegal detention and torture of one Ms Shoba Rani in November 2005.[35] The courts also awarded compensation in a few cases of torture and custodial deaths. These included grant of compensation of Rs 10 lakh by the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court in January 2005 to the family of a young jeweler who died in illegal police custody in Nagpur in 2003;[36] grant of Rs 1 lakh by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Shillong in February 2005 to the next of kin of Banjoplang Kharbamon, who was gunned down by CRPF personnel in May 2003;[37] grant of Rs three lakh by the Delhi High Court in May 2005 to the kin of a custodial death victim Indal Singh who was killed in January 1996;[38] grant of Rs 75,000 in May 2005 by the Gauhati High Court to one Ningthoujam Pishak-macha Devi, who was beaten up at her house by the security forces in Manipur on 2 March 1996;[39] grant of Rs 2 lakh by the Delhi High Court in September 2005 to a taxi-driver, Surender Singh who was shot and injured by a traffic police ASI Anoop Singh on 9 August 2004;[40] and grant of Rs 1 lakh by the Guwahati High Court in November 2005 to the kin of Mayengbam Bisheshwar and Maibam Naobi of Manipur who were killed by troops of the 8th Assam Rifles on 22 July 2000.[41]"

Document(s): Open document

13.12.2006 - Source: Asian Centre for Human Rights

Extra-judicial killings ("SAARC Human Rights Report 2006") [ID 18214]

"Besides torture, there were also reports of killings in fake encounters and indiscriminate use of fire-arms. During 2005, 355 civilians were killed and 373 civilians were injured in police firing alone.[42] Some of the cases of killings in police firing included killing of Bal Singh and Ratan at Peepalkhedi village near Soyat in Shajapur district of Madhya Pradesh on 28 April 2005;[43] killing of six Telugu Desam Party supporters at Penukonda in Andhra Pradesh's Anantapur district on 8 May 2005,[44] killing of Insaf Ali and Saifuddin Ahmed, members of a Joint Forest Management Committee at Borotari village under Sipajhar police station in Darrang district of Assam on 14 May 2005,[45] killing of Dillip Mahanta in Keonjhar district of Orissa on 8 June 2005,[46] killing of five farmers at Pipli village near Jaipur, Rajasthan on 13 June 2005,[47] and killing of five students at Williamnagar in East Garo Hills district and four students at Tura in West Garo Hills district of Meghalaya in indiscriminate firing by the security forces on 30 September 2005.[48] The highhandedness of the security forces also led to violations of the right to life. Some of such cases included killing of a lorry driver Jhantu Das by Assistant Commandant W Rajendra Singh of 46th Battalion of Border Security Force under Kalamchoura police station in West Tripura district on 26 March 2005;[49] killing of Dudhnath Yadav by Railway Protection Force constable G S Pandey at Sewree railway station on 25 April 2005;[50] and killing of Ashutosh Roy by BSF personnel at Sreepur border outpost in West Bengal on 24 August 2005.[51] There were also reports of extrajudicial executions in fake encounters including of Deven Lahkar by the army personnel at Burburi village under Ghograpar police station in Nalbari district, Assam on the night of 17 January 2005;[52] Mohammad Rafiq Ganie and Mukhtar Ahmad Bhat by the 17th Jammu and Kashmir Light Infantry personnel on 27 February 2005 after arresting them while traveling from Yaripora to Munadgufan in Jammu and Kashmir;[53] Kamkhosei Khongsai of Lhungjang village under Saikul subdivision of Manipur by 13th Assam Rifles troops after picking him up on the evening of 23 April 2005;[54] Keshorjit Singh of the Nongada area in Imphal East district, Manipur in an alleged fake encounter on 21 June 2005 by the Assam Rifles personnel;[55] Ahanthem Rameshwor by the Assam Rifles troops based at Sagolmang in Manipur on 30 June 2005,[56] and Sajad Ahmed Budroo, an autorickshaw driver, in the custody of Rashtriya Rifles in Dooru Anantnag of Jammu and Kashmir on 27 October 2005.[57] In some cases of indiscriminate use of fire-arms, the state governments paid compensation. On 19 January 2005, the state government of Manipur agreed to pay an ex-gratia of Rs 1 lakh[58] to the family members of Lourembam Maipak and a 9-year-old girl Thokchom Puspa who were extrajudicially killed by personnel of the CRPF personnel in Thoubal district on the evening of 18 January 2005.[59] On 16 March 2005, Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Babulal Gaur announced ex gratia of Rs 1 lakh each to the family of deceased, Honey alias Aniket (6) and Pappu Lodhi (17) and Rs 10,000 each to those injured (over 12) when the police opened fire at a protesting mob on 15 March 2005 at Banda in Sagar district of Madhya Pradesh.[60] But prosecution of the guilty personnel remained elusive."

Document(s): Open document

13.12.2006 - Source: Asian Centre for Human Rights

Arbitrary arrest, illegal detention and torture ("SAARC Human Rights Report 2006") [ID 18215]

"Cases of arbitrary arrest, illegal detention and torture of detainees were consistently reported from across the country. The complaints included arbitrary detention and torture by application of electric shock to a tea vendor, Sami Akhtar at Mayur Vihar Phase-II in Delhi on the night of 17 February 2005;[61] torture of Rajpal Singh by Delhi police at Bhati Mines police post of Mehruli on 19 September 2005;[62] beating of one Dinesh by Line Par Police Station House Officer Virender Singh in Bahadurgarh town in Jhajjar district of Haryana on 15 October 2005;[63] and beating of Showkat Ahmad Shalla at Nawa Kadal in Jammu and Kashmir on 27 June 2005.[64] In several cases, torture of the victims was confirmed by medical reports. Medical test conducted by the Deen Dayal Upadhaya Hospital in Delhi reportedly confirmed the presence of burn marks and physical injuries on Raju and Titoo of Palam Colony, who were tortured after being picked up by the police from Dabri in southwest Delhi on 30 August 2005.[65] The armed forces were also responsible for torture, including of Mohammad Lateef Mir by the security forces of Bonora camp in Pulwama district of Jammu and Kashmir on the intervening night of 23 and 24 January 2005;[66] Hemin Khongsai and Manginlun Thangsing by the 14th Assam Rifles at Kangpokpi area in Manipur in February 2005;[67] Jitul Saikia and Nripen Saikia at Biyakorua village under Merapani police station in Golaghat district of Assam in May 2005;[68] Alok Basumatary, president of Jharbari unit of All Boro Students' Union by the army personnel of Jharbari in Kokrajhar, Assam on 4 May 2005;[69] and torture of 50-year-old mentally challenged Okram Kunjabihari of Nambol Kha-jiri Mamang Leikai in Manipur by the personnel of the 22 Maratha Light Infantry on 21 May 2005.[70] The armed forces desployed in armed conflict situations rarely admitted arrests of innocent persons and suspects. On 7 March 2005, Tongbram Ibungomcha Singh of Thanga along with four others was picked up by four Assam Rifles personnel without issuing arrest memo from Phumlou area of Bishnupur district in Manipur. Following the Manipur State Human Rights Commission's intervention, the Officer- in-Charge of Lamshang police station, after investigation, confirmed that Tongbram Ibungomcha Singh was under the custody of the Assam Rifles till 24 March 2005 while other four were released on different dates.[71]"

Document(s): Open document

13.12.2006 - Source: Asian Centre for Human Rights

Torture of children ("SAARC Human Rights Report 2006") [ID 18428]

"Children were also subjected to torture by the law enforcement personnel. In February 2005, a 12-year-old boy was allegedly tortured in police custody by N Islam, Officer-in-Charge of Hallydiganj police outpost in West Garo Hills district of Meghalaya without any reason. The boy reportedly sustained a fracture in his right leg due to the beating.[240] Salwinder Singh, Sub-Inspector of Crime Investigation Agency (CIA) of Amritsar, Punjab was suspended for giving electric shocks to 10-year-old Sumit, a student of Class IV in January 2005. The boy was released after his father allegedly handed over a cheque of Rs 2.35 lakh – signed under coercion – to the Sub-Inspector.[241] Sub-Inspector Singh was later suspended.[242] Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda ordered a probe after a television news channel showed a clip of a 14 year old boy being tortured by the police at the CIA police station in Panchkula on 13 March 2005. The boy was accused of theft from the Mansa Devi temple. He was also hung upside down from a tree as punishment.[243] In January 2005, a city court rejected the bail plea of a Delhi Police Sub Inspector Parveen Kumar, who was accused of assaulting a boy by injecting petrol and thinner into his rectum for refusing to pay Rs 50,000 as bribe for his release at Ambedkar Nagar Police station in Delhi on the intervening night of 13 and 14 June 2004.[244]"

Document(s): Open document

06.12.2006 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Arbitrary searches of the headquarters of the human rights organisation MASUM ("Arbitrary searches of the headquarters of MASUM [IND 002 / 1206 / OBS 144]") [ID 18938]

Document(s): Open document

04.09.2006 - Source: Amnesty International

2 human rights defenders accused of links with armed group refused to pay bail monies as charges are false; both were tortured in detention ("Further Information on Urgent Action 228/06 (ASA 20/020/2006, 25 August 2006) [ASA 20/022/2006]") [ID 17659]

Document(s): Open document

25.08.2006 - Source: Amnesty International

Manipur: 2 human rights defenders reportedly tortured in police custody; their exact place of detention is unclear ("Urgent Action 228/06 [ASA 20/020/2006]") [ID 17617]

Document(s): Open document

20.06.2006 - Source: Human Rights Watch

Don’t Torture Sikh Activist Extradited by U.S. ("Don’t Torture Sikh Activist Extradited by U.S.") [ID 15734]

Document(s): Open document

25.11.2005 - Source: BBC News

Prime suspect in 1993 bombings in Mumbai allegedly tortured by police following his extradition to India from Portugal ("India 'most wanted' torture claim") [#39771],  [ID 6818]

Document(s): Open document

03.11.2005 - Source: BBC News

Villagers in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka state killed, raped and tortured by police during search for outlaw Veerappan, who was shot dead in October 2004 ("Report details police atrocities") [#38587],  [ID 6819]

Document(s): Open document

08.2005 - Source: Freedom House

Annual survey of political rights and civil liberties 2004 ("Freedom in the World 2005") [#41316],  [ID 6820]

"[...]Police routinely torture or otherwise ill-treat suspects to extract confessions or bribes. Custodial rape of female detainees continues to be a problem, as does routine abuse of ordinary prisoners, particularly minorities and members of the lower castes. Police brutality appears to be especially prevalent in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, which has high levels of custodial deaths and extrajudicial executions, according to a 2003 briefing paper released by the New Delhi - based Human Rights Documentation Centre. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), whose profile has grown since its creation in 1993, is headed by a retired Supreme Court judge and handles roughly 75,000 complaints each year. However, while it monitors abuses, initiates investigations, and makes independent assessments, its recommendations are often not implemented and it has few enforcement powers. Reports by the NHRC, Human Rights Watch, and a number of other groups alleged that police in Gujarat had been given orders by the state government not to intervene during the communal violence that engulfed the state in 2002 and that police have been reluctant to register complaints against those accused of murder, rape, and other crimes, or arrest those known to have played a role in the rioting. Since the riots, scores of Muslim men in Gujarat have been illegally detained and interrogated about their involvement in subsequent attacks such as the killing of former minister Haren Pandya in March 2003, according to Amnesty International. More generally, the failure of the Indian criminal justice system to protect the rights of, and provide equal protection under the law to, minorities, dalits (untouchables), and other underprivileged groups remains a concern.

Police, army, and paramilitary forces continue to be implicated in disappearances, extrajudicial killing, rape, torture, arbitrary detention, and destruction of homes, particularly in the context of insurgencies in Kashmir, Andhra Pradesh, Assam, and several other northeastern states.[...]"

Document(s): Open document

09.05.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

Jammu, Kashmir, Northeast: Report focused on human rights abuses committed by security forces and facilitated by Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act ("Briefing on the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958") [#31879],  [ID 6821]

"[...]Amnesty International has received reports that the AFSPA has in practice facilitated the torture and ill-treatment of people while in custody. In 1991, Supreme Court Advocate Nandita Haksar recorded the use of torture by armed forces and police in the Northeast to include: “ i). beating with riffle butts, kicking with boots and hitting with blunt weapons, ii). giving electric shocks, iii). depriving persons of food and drink and beating on soles of the feet, iv). threat to shoot, interrogation with gun pointed at forehead or inside the mouth.” Amnesty International has received dozens of reports of torture and ill-treatment, including sexual attacks, in areas where the AFSPA is in force. [...]"

Document(s): Open document

15.04.2005 - Source: Human Rights Watch

European Convention on Human Rights: The case of Chahal v. United Kingdom (practice of torture, mistreatment of prisoners) ("Still at Risk. Diplomatic Assurances No Safeguard Against Torture") [#31279],  [ID 6822]

"[...][T]he United Nations' Special Rapporteur on Torture has described the practice of torture upon those in police custody [in India] as "endemic" and has complained that inadequate measures are taken to bring those responsible to justice. . .The NHRC [Indian National Human Rights Commission] has also drawn attention to the problems of widespread, often fatal, mistreatment of prisoners and has called for a systematic reform of the police throughout India. . .Although the Court does not doubt the good faith of the Indian Government in providing the assurances mentioned above, it would appear that, despite the efforts of that Government, the NHRC and the Indian courts to bring about reform, the violation of human rights by certain members of the security forces in Punjab and elsewhere in India is a recalcitrant and enduring problem. . .Against this background, the Court is not persuaded that the above assurances would provide Mr. Chahal with an adequate guarantee of safety.[...]"

Document(s): Open document

13.01.2005 - Source: Human Rights Watch

Annual report on human rights situation in 2004 ("World report 2005") [#28211],  [ID 6823]

"[...]But POTA’s repeal has not ended the legal impunity that security agencies enjoy. Laws such as the National Security Act, the Disturbed Areas Act, the Armed Forces Special Powers Act or the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act have spawned abuses in various parts of the country, including many deaths in custody and widespread allegations of torture. These laws give security agencies unchecked powers of detention that often foster torture during interrogation. [...]
In Kashmir, military, paramilitary, and police forces continue their practice of torturing detainees and custodial killings. There has also been a nationwide rise in allegations of extrajudicial executions by security forces, who typically justify their actions by claiming to have killed suspects in an exchange of gunfire. [...]"

Document(s): Open document

12.10.2004 - Source: South Asia Human Rights Documentation Centre

The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Ordinance contains notable improvements to the POTA, but also include verbatim provisions from the POTA that were repeatedly misused and adds provisions which further erode the rights of the accused ("The Reincarnation of POTA - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Ordinance is POTA’s Second Coming [HRF/106/04]") [#26387],  [ID 6824]

"[...]The provisions under POTA had been the cause of egregious misuse by way of interrogations that amounted to torture, or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Further, any confessions made under interrogation would be admissible as evidence in court. This combined to inadvertently (or otherwise) condone the use of torture, now a well-documented consequence of the use of POTA. Despite the reticence of the newly elected United Progressive Alliance (UPA) Government to signal a sincere commitment to abolishing torture in India by ratifying the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT), the repeal of the admissibility of confessions, in accordance with the Indian Evidence Act, is welcomed. The obligation to furnish any information to “any officer” under POTA has also been revoked.
[...]"

Document(s): Open document
Open document

10.2004 - Source: UK Home Office

Methods of ill treatment of Sikhs ("Country Report - October 2004") [#28325],  [ID 6825]

"[...]6.107 The Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture, 1999, examined 95 male Sikhs between 1991 and 1999, of whom all but eight were educated to at least secondary school level, and roughly half came from farming families and worked on the farm after finishing their education or had farming related jobs. The majority had belonged to an organisation such as the All India Sikh Student Federation. Most had been arrested on many occasions, usually for a short time ranging from 1 to 10 days, but the total time in custody ranged from 2 days to 8 months. Most were held by the police in the village police station, and a large majority were never charged with any offence. Some of the Sikhs in the study stated that in addition to their detentions, they had been arrested, questioned and threatened many times, but not detained overnight. [30](p11-14)

6.108 All of the Sikhs examined by the Medical Foundation as part of the study as cited in the 1999 Care of Victims of Torture report, reported that they had been severely ill-treated, usually worse in the first few days of detention. The methods of ill treatment included being beaten unconscious; being beaten with truncheons, fists, boots, lathis (bamboo canes), leather belts with metal buckles, pattas (leather straps with wooden handles), rifle butts, metal rods or a metal chain, and branches torn from a thorn bush. They were beaten on various parts of the body, but principally on the back, the legs or the buttocks. Beatings over the head and on the soles of the feet were also prevalent. Many had been suspended by the wrists, ankles or hair, and beaten; some had had their wrists tied behind their back and then were suspended, causing injuries to the shoulder joints. Electric shocks were given; the infliction of burns and the removal of fingernails. Another torture method consisted of forcing the hips strongly apart, often to 180 degrees, repeatedly or continuously. A thick wooden roller or a ghotna (a pestle 4 feet long and 4 inches in diameter used for grinding corn) was often rolled down the calves or thighs with one or more of the heaviest policemen standing on it. [30](p14-16)

6.109 According to the 1999 Medical Foundation Report, much of this abuse took place during interrogation sessions, but beatings also occurred randomly at other times, including late at night when the policemen were drunk. As well as physical abuse, many suffered psychological abuse such as threats of further punishment, death or harm to their families, mock executions and extreme humiliation. [30](p15-16)

6.110 The Medical Foundation report of 1999 found that most of the Sikhs in their study were released without charge after representations by the village elders, a politician or lawyer, but on many occasions only after the payment of a large bribe. [30](p17)
[...]"

Document(s): Open document

09.07.2004 - Source: BBC News

Kashmir: 15 people injured as thousands have protested in Handwara against the alleged police torture of a schoolgirl ("Kashmir 'torture' sparks protest") [#23942],  [ID 6826]

Document(s): Open document

23.06.2004 - Source: Asian Centre for Human Rights

Punjab: police and paramilitary forces torture and enjoy impunity ("Torture in Punjab (ACHRF/26/04)") [#23612],  [ID 6827]

Document(s): Open document

04.2004 - Source: UK Home Office

Country Report - April 2004 ("Country Report - April 2004") [#22427],  [ID 6828]

Document(s): Open document

23.03.2004 - Source: UN Human Rights Council (formerly UN Commission on Human Rights)

Report on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (English, French and Spanish) ("Civil and political rights, including the questions of: Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; Report of the Special Rapporteur, Theo van Boven; Addendum: Summary of information, including individual cases, transmitted to Governments and replies received [E/CN.4/2004/56/Add.1]") [#23236],  [ID 6829]

Document(s): Open document

04.03.2004 - Source: UN Human Rights Council (formerly UN Commission on Human Rights)

Report containing summaries of urgent appeals and communications concerning the independence of the judiciary, administration of justice and impunity ("Civil and political rights including the question of: Independence of the judiciary, administration of justice, impunity; report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Leandro Despouy, submitted in accordance with Commission on Human Rights resolution 2003/43; Addendum: Situations in specific countries or territories [E/CN.4/2004/60/Add.1]") [#20570],  [ID 6830]

Document(s): Open document

03.03.2004 - Source: UN Human Rights Council (formerly UN Commission on Human Rights)

Report focused on violence against women - individual cases documented ("Violence against women: Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women its causes and consequences, Yakin Ertürk E/CN.4/2004/66/Add.1") [#21425],  [ID 6831]

Document(s): Open document

25.02.2004 - Source: US Department of State

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2003 ("Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2003") [#19765],  [ID 6832]

"The law prohibits torture, and confessions extracted by force generally are inadmissible in court; however, authorities often used torture during interrogations. In other instances, authorities tortured detainees to extort money and sometimes as summary punishment.
The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture has reported that the security forces systematically tortured persons in Jammu and Kashmir to coerce confessions to militant activity, to reveal information about suspected militants, or to inflict punishment for suspected support or sympathy with militants.

In a 1996 report, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture noted that methods of torture included beating, rape, crushing the leg muscles with a wooden roller, burning with heated objects, and electric shocks. Because many alleged torture victims died in custody, and others were afraid to speak out, there were few firsthand accounts, although marks of torture often were found on the bodies of deceased detainees. For example, in February, there were protests in the villages of Handwara and Tral, after a Rashtriya Rifles unit detained two villagers, allegedly tortured them for 2 days and then released them. There were no reports of action taken in any of these cases. Unlike in 2001, the Home Ministry again did not extend an invitation to the U.N. Special Rapporteurs on Torture and on Extrajudicial Killings.

The prevalence of torture by police in detention facilities throughout the country was reflected in the number of cases of deaths in police custody (see Section 1.a.). New Delhi's Tihar jail was notorious for the mistreatment of prisoners, with approximately 10 percent of custodial deaths nationwide occurring there. Police and jailers typically assaulted new prisoners for money and personal articles. In addition, police commonly tortured detainees during custodial interrogation. Although police officers were subject to prosecution for such offenses under the Penal Code, the Government often failed to hold them accountable. According to AI, torture usually takes place under two scenarios: In the course of regular criminal investigations, and following unlawful and arbitrary arrests. For example, during criminal investigations, police frequently resorted to torture to extract information from suspects while in custody.

There was no action taken, nor was any action likely to be taken, against the police officers responsible for the 2002 torture of a 37-year-old man from Chennai.

The family of the 14-year-old girl allegedly abducted, tortured, and raped for 6 days by Patiala police in Punjab in 2001 filed a report with the state authorities to press for prosecution of the responsible police officer. No action was taken by the state government at year’s end.

There also were incidents in which police beat journalists (see Section 2.a.), demonstrators (see Section 2.b.), and Muslim students (see Section 2.c.). Police also committed abuses against tribal people (see Section 5).

The rape of persons in custody was part of the broader pattern of custodial abuse. NGOs asserted that rape by police, including custodial rape, was more common than NHRC figures indicated. A higher incidence of abuse appeared credible, given other evidence of abusive behavior by police and the likelihood that many rapes were unreported due to a sense of shame and a fear of retribution among victims. However, legal limits placed on the arrest, search, and police custody of women appeared effectively to limit the frequency of rape in custody. In January 2002, a tribal woman alleged that she was raped by the head constable in Vaniyyambadi Police Station in Tamil Nadu after being arrested on theft charges. The case was pending in the Chennai High Court at year's end.

During the year, the state government arrested three BSF members and ordered an inquiry into the 2002 case of the 17-year-old girl allegedly raped by three BSF force personnel in Pahalgam. The three accused were arrested, and the BSF commenced a Staff Court of Inquiry. The inquiry continued at year's end.

There was a pattern of rape by paramilitary personnel in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast as a means of instilling fear among noncombatants in insurgency-affected areas (see Section 1.g.). It was not included in NHRC statistics because it involved the military forces, over which the NHRC does not have direct investigative authority.

[...]In January 2002, a tribal woman alleged that she was raped by the head constable in Vaniyyambadi Police Station in Tamil Nadu after being arrested on theft charges. The case was pending in the Chennai High Court at year's end. [...]

[...]Country-wide, there were allegations that military and paramilitary forces engaged in abduction, torture, rape, arbitrary detention, and the extrajudicial killing of militants and noncombatant civilians, particularly in areas of insurgencies (see Sections 1.b., 1.c., 1.d., and 1.g.). Human rights groups alleged that police often faked encounters to cover up the torture and subsequent killing of both militants and noncombatants.[...]"

Document(s): Open document

05.01.2004 - Source: BBC News

Assam: The founder of a separatist rebel army United Liberation Front of Assam (Ulfa) from north-eastern India says he was tortured after his capture ("Captured rebel: India tortured me") [#18575],  [ID 6833]

Document(s): Open document

15.12.2003 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

West Bengal: Arbitrary detention and torture of 13-year-old by members of the Magrahat Police Station, South Parganas District, reported ("India: Torture of 13-year-old boy [Case IND 151203.CC]") [#18239],  [ID 6834]

Document(s): Open document

06.11.2003 - Source: Amnesty International

Report presenting well-founded reports of the use of arbitrary and illegal detention by Crime Branch police in Ahmedabad in the past year ("India: Abuse of the law in Gujarat: Muslims detained illegally in Ahmedabad") [#17350],  [ID 6835]

"[...] The courts in Gujarat have to date failed to take any action to prevent or investigate and prosecute most of these illegal actions despite on occasion being confronted with allegations and evidence. The widespread use of incommunicado detention by police against members of the Muslim minority in Ahmedabad is reported to have terrorised the Muslim community who have been too scared to make official complaints.(4) Detailed information on other individuals has been almost impossible to confirm because of the reluctance of relatives to make complaints for fear of retribution preventing lawyers from challenging the illegal detentions in any formal legal proceedings. [...]

Amnesty International understands that only a handful of habeas corpus petitions have been filed on behalf of those illegally detained, because of the overwhelming fear of retribution amongst relatives and even lawyers. However, what is of considerable concern is that the High Court appears to have ignored their complaints thereby denying them their right to have their complaint of torture independently and impartially investigated as set out under Article 13 of the United Nations (UN) Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention against Torture). Their cases appear to exemplify the routine flouting (and acceptance of that flouting) of safeguards against torture or ill-treatment by institutions of the criminal justice system. [...]

The detention of individuals in a police station or unofficial detention centre without recording the fact is a fundamental human rights violation which encourages further abuse in the form of torture. Detainees are effectively "disappeared"(15) and deprived of all rights and law enforcement officials have unfettered power over them. The UN Commission on Human Rights has repeatedly stated that "prolonged incommunicado detention may facilitate the perpetration of torture and can in itself constitute a form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment."(16) [...]

ii. Torture


Torture is prohibited under international human rights law. Even in states of emergency it is a non-derogable right, as emphasised in Article 2(2) of the Convention against Torture. Article 7 of the ICCPR states that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment".

Amnesty International is concerned at allegations that W and X were subjected to torture or ill-treatment while in police custody. Due to the prevailing (and in Amnesty International’s view well-founded) fear of retribution, allegations of torture or ill-treatment from Muslims arrested in recent months in Gujarat have been few. On 22 July 2003 it was reported that 29 detainees brought before the special POTA court in Ahmedabad on 21 July complained that they had been coerced into making confessions and signing confessional statements by police detaining them.(19) Amnesty International has also received several unconfirmed reports of the torture and ill-treatment of those detained illegally. In such a situation, it is paramount that detainees are given opportunities to make complaints to an independent body and to be protected from retribution during the course of any investigation and after, as required by the Convention against Torture. The role of an independent judiciary in providing such opportunities is crucial and a central tenet of international standards for the protection of detainees. However, Amnesty International is concerned that the judiciary in Gujarat has failed to carry out its obligations in this regard, despite the fact that evidence was placed before the court of the illegal detention and torture of W and X, practices in clear violation of both Indian law and international human rights standards to which India is a party.

Judges have a special responsibility to ensure that all allegations of torture which come to their attention at any stage of the judicial process are subject to prompt and impartial investigation by competent and independent bodies. Article 12 of the Convention against Torture states that "Each State Party shall ensure that its competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed in any territory under its jurisdiction."(20) Article 13 of the Convention goes further, stating that "Each State Party shall ensure that any individual who alleges he has been subjected to torture in any territory under its jurisdiction has the right to complain to, and to have his case promptly and impartially examined by, its competent authorities. Steps shall be taken to ensure that the complainant and witnesses are protected against all ill-treatment or intimidation as a consequence of his complaint or any evidence given." [...]"

Document(s): Open document
Open document

27.10.2003 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

West Bengal: Labour worker, who was arrested by the Hogalberia police, died in custody reportedly as a result of torture ("India: the death as the result of torture of Mr. Deben Sardar [Case IND 271003]") [#17073],  [ID 6836]

Document(s): Open document

29.09.2003 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Kerala: Man died in detention in the Pudukkad police station, reportedly after being tortured by police officers ("India: death in detention of Mr. M. V. Babu as a result of torture [Case IND 290903]") [#16298],  [ID 6837]

Document(s): Open document

04.08.2003 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Manipur: a former member of the United National Liberation Front (UNLF), an armed opposition group demanding Manipur's independence, tortured and arrested by members of the Assam Rifles’ 17th Battalion ("India: torture and forced disappearance of Mr. Ningthoujam Boby [Case IND 040803]") [#14811],  [ID 6838]

Document(s): Open document

23.07.2003 - Source: Amnesty International

Gujarat: 2 men detained by Crime Branch police officers of the police tortured/ their wifes were harassed ("India - UA 222/03") [#14626],  [ID 6839]

Document(s): Open document

04.07.2003 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Tamil Nadu: Humiliation and torture of people in the name of a police inquiry in Vittukatti, reported ("India: torture of a number of arbitrarily arrested murder suspects") [#14073],  [ID 6840]

Document(s): Open document

14.01.2003 - Source: UN Human Rights Council (formerly UN Commission on Human Rights)

Report focused on violence against women (its causes and consequences) ("Integration of the human rights of women and the gender perspective: The violence against women [E/CN.4/2003/75/Add.2]") [#11278],  [ID 6841]

Document(s): Open document

30.01.2002 - Source: Amnesty International

5 Nepalis, arrested in December, reportedly held incommunicado, tortured during interrogation first by Delhi police, and then by Nepali police officers in Lucknow, released ("India - UA 321/01") [#5452],  [ID 6842]

Document(s): Open document

18.12.2001 - Source: Amnesty International

Fear of torture and ill treatment of 5 Nepalis who were taken away by men believed to be members of the Indian security forces/ ("India - UA 321/01") [#5065],  [ID 6843]

Document(s): Open document

06.11.2001 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Uttar Pradesh: 3 brothers arrested and allegedly subjected to severe forms of torture, one of them died ("India : arbitrary arrests and torture of three brothers, one of whom subsequently died, in Lucknow [Case IND 061101]") [#4532],  [ID 6844]

Document(s): Open document