Jharkhand HC orders probe into 260+ custodial death cases
Why in News
Jharkhand High Court termed custodial killings 'worst crime' and ordered a fresh probe into over 260 cases of alleged custodial deaths. This highlights judicial intervention against state excesses.
Background
Judicial oversight is crucial for upholding Art. 21 (Right to Life) and Art. 22 (Protection against arrest/detention) against state violence. It reinforces police accountability and human rights protection.
Key Figure
• 260+ — alleged custodial death cases ordered for fresh probe.
Key Facts
- 1Art. 21: Guarantees Right to Life and Personal Liberty, interpreted by SC to include protection from custodial violence.
- 2Art. 22: Provides protection against arrest and detention in certain cases, including rights of arrested persons.
- 3Art. 226: Empowers High Courts to issue writs (Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, etc.) for enforcement of fundamental rights.
- 4National Human Rights Commission (NHRC): Statutory body (est. 1993 under PHRA) | HQ: New Delhi | investigates human rights violations.
- 5State Human Rights Commissions (SHRCs): Statutory bodies (est. under PHRA 1993) | investigate human rights violations within their state.
- 6D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997): SC laid down guidelines to be followed by police and other agencies in cases of arrest and detention.
Exam Angle
The High Court's intervention underscores the critical role of judicial review in ensuring state accountability and protecting fundamental rights against custodial violence, necessitating comprehensive police reforms.
PYQ Connection
PRELIMS_FACT|ASSERTION_REASON: Fundamental Rights (Art. 21, 22), High Court powers (Art. 226), NHRC mandate.